Violation of the Do Finance Business Act, transfer of stolens, storage of stolens

The seized type of router(Evidence Nos. 24), procoper(verification No. 25), Bok-camper(verification No. 26), Kampha(verification No. 27) shall be confiscated, respectively.

One allon (No. 2), Samsung Tallon (No. 7) shall be returned to each victim's name in return for a seized opalon (No. 2) and one gallon (No. 7).

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of transferring stolens is acquitted.

The summary of the acquittal part in this judgment shall be publicly notified.

【Criminal Power】

On January 26, 199, the Defendant: (a) was sentenced to a fine of one million won for an attempted larceny at the Seoul Eastern District Court on January 26, 199; (b) was sentenced to imprisonment for six months at the Seoul Central District Court on January 29, 199; (c) was sentenced to a fine of one million won for an attempted larceny; (d) on April 14, 2008 at the same court on July 8, 2008, in the same court on July 8, 2008, sentenced to a suspended sentence of eight months; (e) was sentenced to imprisonment for an act of larceny; (g) one year and six months for an act of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; and (v) on July 8, 2015, the Defendant completed the last sentence on July 24, 2016.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Violation of the Aggravated Punishment Act;

On August 27, 2016, at around 03:40 on August 27, 2016, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol from the stairs of the entrance of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C building, cut off one part of the wall 50,000 won in cash from the main machine to the victim D, and 500,000 won in the market price containing credit cards.

In addition, from around that time to April 25, 2017, the Defendant committed larceny on four occasions, such as the list of crimes in the annexed list of crimes, and stolen property equivalent to the total amount of KRW 25,105,00,000, by committing a special larceny over six occasions.

As a result, the defendant was sentenced to punishment twice or more due to larceny, etc., and again stolen another person's property over 10 times in total within three years after the execution of the sentence is completed.

2. Violation of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act;

The Defendant conspired to receive cash services, etc. using E (one name F), G (one name H) and stolen credit cards and mobile phones.

At around 2016, 11, and 5, the Defendant: (a) stolen the I bank’s credit card and Samsung Card from the stairs of the building near the 412-ro, Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Y, and found it out to E, G; (b) discovered the password of Korea bank’s credit card and Samsung Card by influencing it; (c) withdrawn from Korea’s credit card using the Samsung Card with a cash amount of KRW 1,00,000 by receiving KRW 2,90,000,000; and (d) used the stolen credit card from around that time to April 21, 2017 by taking cash services more than three times in total and withdrawing KRW 5,90,000 by withdrawing the total amount of KRW 5,00,000,000 by using the Samsung Card.

Accordingly, the Defendant used stolen credit cards in collusion with E and G.

3. Keeping stolen goods;

On April 23, 2017, the Defendant received a request from a person who was killed in a name (so-called "so-called "so-called" J) to keep one opon (so-called 800,000 won at the market price that he stolen) in the street near the Gohap-dong Seoul Mapo-gu, Mapo-gu, and received a request from the Defendant to keep one opon (so-called "so-called opon") at the Defendant's home, even though he was aware that the opon was a stolen object, and kept the stolen at the Defendant'

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement to I and K;

1. Each statement of D, L, M, N,O, P, and Q;

1. Protocols of seizure and list of seizure (No. 43, 44, 53, 54 No. 54);

1. Each investigation report (such as investigation of CCTV around the site, the form of a cash withdrawn suspect, and areas surrounding the scene of occurrence;

CCTV Confirmation)

1. Card transactions details, etc. (No. 34, 36 No. 53);

1. Previous convictions indicated: Criminal history records, response reports, investigation reports ( majority of the same type repeated crimes, and the same type of criminal records);

1. Habituality of the holding: The method and frequency of each crime in the holding, and one month after being released from the prison, even though he had been sentenced to several times for the same crime, are again causing the crime of this case. In view of the fact that the habit of larceny is recognized;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 5-4(6) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 329 and 331(2) of the Criminal Act (including habitual theft and comprehensive theft), Article 70(1)3 of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the use of each stolen credit card), Article 362(1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of storage of stolen goods and the choice of imprisonment)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Code (In the case of habitual larceny, there is a previous conviction of the first head at the time of sale)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, Article 50, and the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act [the penalty shall be imposed on concurrent crimes with the punishment stipulated in the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which is the largest

1. Confiscation;

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

1. Return to a victim;

Article 333(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of punishment by law;

From 3 years to 50 years of imprisonment;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Violation of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes;

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

[Special Aggravation] Special Aggravation: Where a person repeatedly commits a crime using a special method, tool or organization;

[Scope of Recommendation] Three to Six years (Aggravated Zone)

(b) Whether sentencing criteria are not set for a violation of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act;

(c) Storage of stolen goods;

[Determination of Types] 1 stolens (the stolens for general decorations).

【Special Convicted Person】

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of six months to one year and six months (Basic Area)

(d) Scope of recommendations according to the standards for handling multiple crimes;

Imprisonment for not less than three years;

3. Determination of sentence;

The crime of this case is committed by 2-3 persons who committed a crime, such as a credit card and mobile phone, which stolens a credit card and mobile phone, and then received or withdrawn cash services from an automatic cash payment machine by means of a stolen-related card. In light of the method of crime and the scale of damage, etc., the crime and criminal intent are not good. The victims’ pecuniary damage has not been recovered, and the defendant has a history of six times or punishment for the same crime, and the execution of the final punishment is inevitable for a considerable period of time in that he/she committed a larceny, etc. again in the short period of time.

However, in the course of the investigation, cooperation was made by identifying the personal information of other accomplices in the investigation process, and it seems that the crime was caused to be committed in order to raise living expenses in a difficult situation, and most of the seized damaged goods are returned to the victims.

In addition, the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, such as the age, character and conduct and environment of the defendant, relationship to victims, circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined within the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines.

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

On April 17, 2017, the Defendant sold gallon No. 51, which was stolen, as indicated in [Attachment 5] No. 5, to the one-person wounded in name (one-person J) in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and transferred 2.10,00 won to the third party.

2. Determination

Since the stolen crime is a crime in which another person (principal offender) is involved in the disposal of illegally obtained property, it is not established as to an article obtained by his/her own crime, and it constitutes an act ex post facto facto act (see Supreme Court Decision 86Do1273, Sept. 9, 1986). Thus, the stolen crime does not constitute a separate stolen crime.

Therefore, it cannot be said that the transfer of stolen articles by the defendant, like the above facts charged, to a person who has lost his name, constitutes a crime of transferring stolen articles.

3. Conclusion

Thus, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, is acquitted under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons, and the summary of the acquittal part in this judgment shall be published in accordance with Article 58 (2) of the Criminal Act.

Judges Sung Jae-in

Judges' Index

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.