특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the prosecutor’s (1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the record of the Defendant’s crime, and the method and frequency of the crime, each of the larceny crimes of this case can be sufficiently recognized as being caused by the Defendant’s installation of the theft habit.
Nevertheless, the lower court’s determination that did not recognize habituality of larceny is erroneous.
(2) The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too uneasible and unfair.
B. The sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Determination of misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to habituality
A. Habituality refers to a habit of repeated larceny, and the existence of criminal records of the same kind and the frequency, period, motive, means and method of the crime of the same case shall be determined by taking into comprehensive account the existence of the criminal records of the same kind and the frequency, period, means and methods, etc.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do11550, Feb. 12, 2009). B.
According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the following circumstances can be acknowledged.
(1) From 2003 to 2006, the Defendant was subject to juvenile protective disposition four times due to the crime of larceny, intrusion upon residence, and violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and was sentenced to four times from 2006 to 2009 by imprisonment with prison labor on December 30, 209.
② In light of the contents of each of the above crimes, money and valuables were stolen by intrusion upon another person’s residence, structure, etc. through the open entrance, and are similar to the thief method in this case.
③ On May 15, 2012, the Defendant completed the execution of the said final sentence, and thereafter came to commit each of the larcenys of this case only in one year and nine months during the repeated crime period.
In particular, the Defendant committed the larceny of this case at intervals of about one week on two occasions.
(4) The amount of charges to be collected by the defendant shall be 1.5 million won.