특수절도
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the part concerning special larceny in spite of the fact-misunderstanding (not guilty part) that the dog breeding of this case, which the defendant was deprived, constitutes an object of the act of intrusion in special larceny.
B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment, two years of probation, two years of probation, observation of protection, and community service order 120 hours) is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. On December 29, 2016, around 00:45, the Defendant: (a) committed a theft with a string of 5 million won at the market price located therein, by cutting the steel net prepared in advance to a stringer managed by the victim D, the victim D in Yasan-si; and (b) intrusion into the string box; and (c) cutting the 200,000 won.
B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the charges of larceny on the ground that it is difficult to view the instant dog breeding as an object of intrusion in special larceny, and found the Defendant guilty of larceny in relation to the crime of larceny.
1) The instant dog breeding pool is merely a hack pipe set up in several parts of the container used as a warehouse in a vertical line, connected to the roof be covered by the hacks, and is made up by the wire-conditioning network on the side of the container. 2) In light of its form and material, the instant dog breeding pool can be easily dismantled and easily movable from land without using any special method.
I seem to appear.
3) The breeding pool of this case is established for the purpose of raising the dog, even though it is not absolutely impossible to access the dog, and it seems that it was not constructed for the purpose of removing people or allowing access.
(c)
This Court's decision 1) In case of intrusion theft of residence at night in the related legal principles.