On April 18, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for robbery, etc. at Seoul Southern District Court on two years and six months, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on April 24, 2016.

The Defendant, around 00:00 on July 11, 2016, at “E” operated by the victim D in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, around 00:0, as well as at “E” operated by the victim D in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, the Defendant: (a) covered one gold-free product with the total market value of KRW 4,000,000, which is the victim’s possession of the victim, the victim, who had drinking alcohol, was worn by the victim; (b) stored one gold-free product in the Defendant’s main machine; and (c) stored one gold-free product with the total market price of KRW 4,00,000,000, in cash 270,000, and one transportation card, which is the victim’s possession.

In addition to the defendant's main money, four water mixings in total amounting to 31,800 won in the market value of the victim's possession, which was located on the main bank of the defendant's main bank, 3,800 won in total and 3,800 won in the market value.

Hably, I am.

Accordingly, the Defendant stolen the property equivalent to the total amount of KRW 4,505,600, which is the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and F;

1. A written protocol concerning the examination of the prosecution and the police against the accused;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Protocols of seizure, list of seizure and each photograph thereof;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (the confirmation of previous convictions and copies of judgment);

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes [the scope of recommendations] The reason for sentencing of Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes [the scope of punishment] was that of the crime of this case again committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the crime of the same kind, which does not fall under the aggravation (1 to 3 years) of the aggravated area (1 to 3 years) of the aggravated area (1 to 1 year) for the larceny of general property.

There is no way to deny and reflect the fact of the crime except the fact that coffees and water papers stolen, and there is no effort to recover damage.

In addition, the Act on the Prevention of Crimes of this case was past.