[Attachment, the Defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Daejeon District Court on April 4, 2008, and was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in the Incheon District Court’s Branch on May 12, 201, and on June 19, 201, the Daejeon District Court sentenced on three years of imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Daejeon District Court on April 29, 201 and completed the execution of the sentence at the Daejeon District Court on April 29, 2017.

[2] On September 10, 2017, at around 04:40 on September 10, 2017, the Defendant: (a) used the Victim BA on the second floor of the Suwon-si, Gyeonggi-do Suwon-si, “B” in the operation of the Victim BA (hereinafter referred to as “Grain”), thereby infringing on the lock locking device of the entrance in the entrance, thereby causing a theft of KRW 520,000 in cash owned by the victim who was under storage in a simplified safe inside the calculating unit.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement prepared in BA;

1. Report on occurrence (the theft of intrusion on a structure at night);

1. Reports on internal investigation and investigation reports;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a reply to inquiry, personal confinement status, and confirmation of the same kind of force, and text of judgment;

1. Article 5-4 (5) 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 331 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime committed;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (the following favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing) include the Defendant’s history of having been punished several times for the same kind of crime; further, the Defendant’s age, including equity in the case where the Defendant was tried to have been tried at the same time at the same time for the same kind of crime after having been sentenced to imprisonment several times; the Defendant again committed the same crime during the repeated crime period; the injury has not been recovered or agreed; the Defendant invaded upon the damaged and stolen the object; and the applicable method is also inappropriate.