특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (three months of imprisonment and one year and three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of the Defendant seems to have recognized all of the crimes of this case and divided the errors.
In addition, the degree of injury inflicted by the defendant on the victim H is relatively minor, and the crime in this part is committed on February 28, 2014 and the relation between the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act should be considered.
Furthermore, the fact that the Defendant appears to have been growing in the poor family environment, and there is room to view that the Defendant committed property crimes, such as habitual theft of this case, in order to prepare living expenses after leaving home, etc., should be considered in favor of the Defendant.
However, the crime of this case committed in collaboration with three people who are the defendant, leading the above victim to female toilets in the park, leading the victim's face, bucks, spucks, and sprinks several times. On the other hand, during the suspension period due to the same kind of crime, the crime of this case stolen goods up to nine million won by combining the co-defendant A, who is the co-defendant of the court below, in collaboration with the defendant, or by the method, such as the "veh" in 12 times, etc., and thus, the illegality of such act is not somewhat weak.
In addition, the defendant did not take any measures for the victims' reimbursement of damages.
Furthermore, considering that the above favorable circumstances appear to have been sufficiently reflected in the judgment of the court below on the sentencing, and other circumstances that are conditions for the sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship to victims, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., each of the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.