【Criminal Power】

On February 3, 1993, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in the Seoul District Court. On March 27, 2015, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced ten months of imprisonment for habitual larceny at the Seoul Central District Court, and completed the execution of the sentence on May 6, 2015. On May 18, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for larceny at the Seoul Western District Court and completed the execution of the sentence on October 12, 2016.

【Criminal Facts】

The defendant was sentenced to two or more times for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and habitual larceny, and again stolen the victims' property within three years after the execution of the sentence is completed, as follows:

1. On September 16, 2017, around 12:36, the Defendant: (a) committed theft by taking advantage of the gaps in the “E’s operation of the victim D’s 2nd class 50th floor of the Seoul Jung-gu Seoul Central District Office building C, which arranged the clothing on the sales stand, the Defendant used a cresh in which the victim’s body and shouldered one set of 110,000 won at the front door of female self-denunciation, which is the victim’s ownership, to unfold between the Defendant’s body and shoulder.

2. On September 19, 2017, at around 13:17, the Defendant: (a) used the gap in the victim’s 'G’ 'G operation 113th floor of the third floor of the building C in Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City’, where the victim was able to use the gap in responding to other customers, and stolen the victim’s ownership by putting the victim in a test-style plastic bag that was in possession of 30,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement prepared by the F and D;

1. On-site photographs, to take off on-site CCTV images - on- September 16, 199; to take the images of a crime; to take off on-site CCTV images; - On-site CCTV images; 9.19. Crimes, manual data; and seized Articles and photographs;

1. Reports on internal investigation (related to verification of the fact of damage, etc.), investigation reports (verification and attachment of suspect identification data);

1. Previous convictions: Each investigation report (Evidence List Nos. 14, 23, and 26), results of the inspection of prisoners, criminal records, etc.; four copies of the rulings; one copy of the rulings; one copy of the personal confinement status; and one copy of the case search details;

1. Habituality: Recognition of dampness walls in light of the records of each of the above crimes, the theft of the same law, the frequency of the crimes, and the repeated crimes of the same kind;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 5-4 (6) and 329 (General Provisions) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following consideration for the reasons for sentencing):

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of punishment: Imprisonment with prison labor for at least one year and six months, but not exceeding 25 years;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

The Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

[Determination of Punishment] thief under the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (Habitual thief)

[Recommendation and Recommendation Decision] Basic Field, Imprisonment for not less than two years, but not more than four years;

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months;

The crime of this case is committed by the defendant who has been sentenced to imprisonment with labor for the same kind of crime and has again committed the larceny within one year, and is not in the nature of the crime.

However, there is a lot of frequency of theft crimes committed by the defendant, and damage therefrom is not significant, and the fact that the self-denunciation of women who stolen victims D among victims has been returned is favorable to the defendant.

In addition to the above circumstances, the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship between victims, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and various sentencing conditions, including the circumstances after the crime, are comprehensively considered, and the punishment is determined like the order, beyond the lower limit of the recommended sentencing guidelines.

Judges of the High Instance

Judges Kim Dong-dong