On December 2, 2016, from around 20:30 to around 21:30, the Defendant invadedd the victim D’s 3rd floor of the E-Ba 1st floor, in which the victim D was living in the south C, into the third floor of the said E-Ba 1st floor, and stolen the victim’s market price, 1stm 2nd panty, and 2nd 1st thm 2nd her to the inside hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm hersm herm herm herm herm herm herm herm her

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F or D;

1. Investigation report (investigation into the verification of collected goods), investigation report (investigation into the scene of additional damage, etc.), investigation report (investigation into the scene of additional damage), and investigation report (in relation to the amount not specified as the amount of damage for the damaged goods);

1. Application of statutes on records of seizure and lists of seizure;

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act, as the punishment for concurrent crimes;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria;

A. Recommendations by type of crime (No. 1-3 crimes) / [Scope of Recommendations] 4 types of larceny for general property (Intrusion larceny) / None of the basic areas (No. 1-2-6 months) (a person subject to special sentencing)

(b) Application of standards for handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period from one year to four years;

2. As the Defendant, who had been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a similar crime in 2012, committed a repeated crime, it is necessary to punish him/her as a sentence.

However, considering favorable circumstances such as the fact that most of the damaged goods were returned without value, the fact that confessions made a confession of a crime against the wrong, and the overall factors of sentencing, such as the details and methods of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and social ties, etc., were determined to be lower than the recommended sentencing guidelines.