특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
The seized divers, one (No. 1), one hand (No. 2), one hand, etc.
Punishment of the crime
When the Defendant became aware of the fact that the warning is not given when a car free will is broken down, in order to raise a living cost, the Defendant shouldered the passenger car glass using a drick for the car parked, and sentenced to the theft of the goods in the car.
1. Around 02:00 on February 18, 2013, the Defendant discovered a hived vehicle owned by the victim D, the victim of which was parked in the Ulsan-gu Ulsan-gu Cudio parking lot, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-gu, and damaged the hiver (30cm in length) of the date on which the hiver (30cm in length) previously possessed by the hiver in order to steals the goods in the vehicle, by putting the hiver part of the lower hiver of the vehicle into the lower hiver of the back hiver of the hiver of the vehicle, and then by cutting the glass by the front and rear hiver of the hiver of the hiver of the vehicle.
From around that time to July 14, 2013, the Defendant damaged the victims’ automobile glass to KRW 1,190,000,000 in total, by the same method as the list of crimes in attached Form 116 times.
Accordingly, the defendant habitually damaged the victims' property.
2. Around 02:00 on February 18, 2013, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Habitual thief) (Habitual thief) (Habitual thief) broken off the back glass of the Defendant’s body in the manner described in paragraph 1, which is owned by the victim D, which was parked in the Ulsan-gu Seoul Southern-gu C Studio parking lot, and found a stolen object in the said vehicle. However, the Defendant was unable to find any way but did not commit the attempted crime, including the Defendant’s body, and the Defendant did not have any other things that amount to KRW 8,161,600 in total market value over 73 times in total from that time until July 14, 2013, and did not have any stolen objects and stolen objects over a total of 48 occasions.
Accordingly, the defendant habitually stolen the victims' property.
Summary of Evidence
1. The defendant;