[Criminal history] On November 20, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapons, etc.) at the Incheon District Court on the Punishment of Violences, etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 18, 2015.

[2] The Defendant was sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment on November 26, 2004 due to a crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims Thereof (special robbery, rape, etc.) and was detained in the case of the two North Korean Dos over the 110 North Korean Dos located in the 110th North Korean Dos, and D is a person who served as a correctional officer in the said prison.

No person shall carry in liquor, tobacco, cash, or check to a correctional institution, or carry, use, receive, exchange, or conceal them.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from the end of December 2013 to the beginning of January 2014, 2014, demanded D to demand that D file a lawsuit while living in the two sub-sections of the two sub-sections of the two sub-sections of the above Gyeong-do, North Korea, and demanded that D file two cases over two occasions from D through the above C exhaustle, and received a total of four factorings.

Accordingly, the defendant received alcoholic beverages from correctional institutions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of D by the prosecution;

1. A report on investigation (a photograph of the scene of crime);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Inquiry into criminal records and investigation records (A) and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of reporting criminal investigations (suspect A);

1. Article 132 (1) 1 of the Administration and Treatment of Correctional Institution Inmates Act and the selection of punishment for an offense;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. The reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act that aggravated concurrent crimes shows the attitude of recognizing and opposing the defendant's mistake. The crime of this case is in the relation of concurrent crimes between the previous conviction in the judgment and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and it is advantageous to the defendant.