Seized evidence 2 through 5 shall be confiscated from the accused.

On March 15, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny at the Daejeon District Court for a period of eight months. On September 30, 2013, the same court was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 8, 2013, and the suspended sentence was invalidated. On November 18, 2014, the Defendant completed the execution of each of the above punishment in the Daejeon Prison.

1. On November 19, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 23:58, the victim D in the Dong-gu Daejeon-dong, Daejeon-gu, was “E” operated by the victim D; (b) and (c) took a theft by carrying the victim, who was loaded in front of his/her door, in advance, one out-of-door air conditioner, equivalent to KRW 200,000,000, at the market price of the victim’s possession.

2. On November 23, 2014, at around 23:30 on November 23, 2014, the Defendant, at the place specified in paragraph (1), loaded one out of the air conditioner, which was prepared in advance, with a capital equivalent to 200,000 won at the market price of the victim’s possession, and stolen the Defendant.

3. On November 27, 2014, at around 23:40 on November 27, 2014, the Defendant, at the place described in paragraph (1), loaded the Defendant’s 3:40,000 square meters of the market price of the victim and stolen the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Each photograph;

1. Seizure records;

1. Previous records: Criminal records, current status of confinement by individual, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning investigation reports (Attachment of attached records to the same attached records);

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. In light of the fact that the confiscation is a repeated crime of the same kind in the reason for sentencing Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act, and that the damage recovery has not been performed properly, it is reasonable to sentence the sentence written in the order

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.