On September 10, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny, etc. at the Busan District Court on September 10, 2015 and completed the execution of the sentence in Busan Correctional Institution on August 25, 2016.

From December 2, 2016 to January 2017, the Defendant had been working in the “D” operated by the victim C, which was operated by the victim C from Busan Young-gu, Busan, but had been able to steals money and valuables by using a security card used to enter the above company office even after retirement.

On February 22, 2017, the Defendant came to the above “D” office around 04:10 on February 22, 2017, and completed the work of the victim C and corrected the office and creshed the office, and opened an entrance with a security card and intrudes into the office, and collected KRW 456,000 in cash in the custody of the victim in the safe.

L. A. L. theft was committed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. CCTV images;

1. Previous conviction in judgment: Investigation report (Attachment of a copy of the judgment), personal confinement status, application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquire about criminal history data;

1. Relevant Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime (a thief who intrudes upon residence at night);

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes [Scope of Recommendation] : (a) the mitigated area (from August to January 6) of the mitigated area (special mitigation) [Special Mitigation] / In the case of intrusion into a place other than an indoor residential space, (iv) the same type of repeated crime (determination of sentence) that is not subject to the aggravation of specific crimes may have the same criminal conviction for the defendant; (b) the crime of this case under the same law is committed only six months after the completion of the execution of punishment as stated in the judgment; (c) the defendant reflects the crime; (d) the amount of theft is not large enough in scale; (e) the age and character of the defendant; and (e) other conditions of the sentencing as shown in the oral proceedings, including records and arguments, are considered, to be sentenced to a lower sentence than the lower limit of the recommended sentence under the above sentencing guidelines.