On April 7, 2014, the Defendant habitually invaded the victim's house at the window C Apartment 202, 203, 203, Changwon-si's window 202, 203, and then stolen another's property worth 206,870,000,000 won in total of the market price by using similar methods over a total of 21 times from September 2012 to April 21, 2014 as indicated in the list of crimes, including those with three precious metal worth 1.8,00 won in the victim's 24km, which was kept in custody after racking the inside of the house through a bendra window window that was not corrected.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made against E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L;

1. Each statement of M, N,O, P, Q, R, S, T, U,V, and D;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. Each investigation report (victim W, X, R, J, S,O, U, F, M);

1. Habituality of the judgment: Habituality is recognized in light of the following: The method and frequency of crimes in the judgment, and the fact that the same kind of crimes are repeated continuously; the application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (inclusive of them);

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of the sentencing of the selective sentence of imprisonment is disadvantageous to the following: (a) intrusion upon the victims’ residence and theft of the property; (b) the nature of the crime was bad; (c) the Defendant committed the same veterinary act over a prolonged period of 21 times; (d) the amount of damage was extremely high; (e) the amount of the damage was 200 million won, multiple penal records; and (e) there was no effort to recover any particular damage.

The fact that the defendant recognized the mistake and reflects it, and that there is no same kind of power, etc. shall be considered in favorable circumstances.

In addition, in full view of the motive, background, means and methods of the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the instant crime, and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, career, and environment, as shown in the pleadings of the instant case, the punishment as ordered shall be determined.