(b) Special larceny;

2. B

Attorney D (Korean National Assembly for Defendant B)

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

[Defendant B]

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On September 13, 1994, Defendant A was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Seoul High Court on April 8, 1997, and was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Incheon District Court on July 13, 1999, and was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Seoul District Court on June 11, 2003, Seoul District Court on July 20, 2006, and was sentenced to four years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Seoul Central District Court on December 30, 2010, and on September 22, 2016, Defendant A completed the sentence.

1. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes by Defendant A;

A. On January 22, 2017, at around 18:15, the Defendant stolen the victim’s mobile phone at least eight times in total, as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table, by using the gaps in which the victim F (n, 15 years of age) around the Mapo-gu, Seoul, reported a long-distance performance, and subsequently approaching the victim’s right-hand part of the road, thereby cutting off the victim’s cell phone at the cost of the victim’s 800,000 won, which was located in the victim’s joint right-hand part of the road.

B. At around 19:30 on March 18, 2017, the Defendant used the gap in which the victim I (the victim I (the victim I, 25 years of age) neglected to take care of her friendship with her natives, thereby approaching the victim later, and attempted to steal 1,138,000 the market price of the victim's left part by inserting hand on the part of the victim's own money, but the Defendant failed to commit an attempted to commit a crime, even though it was found that the cell phone was cut off from the part of the victim's own money, and that the cell phone was cut off from the part of the victim's own money.

C. On March 3, 2017, from around 21:37 to 21:46 the same day, the Defendant, together with J, deducted the victim’s property from the victim’s L (n, 25 years of age) at the front of Mapo-gu Seoul K, the victim’s market price at an amount equivalent to KRW 900,000,00, the victim’s ownership, which was the victim’s external mobile phone, was located in the victim’s external mobile phone, and the J stolen the victim’s property by viewing the neighboring network.

D. Around 22:00 on March 3, 2017, the Defendant, together with J, cut off the victim’s property in front of the exit area of 2:2:0 from the street near the exit area of 160 (Songdong-dong-ro, Seoul Mapo-gu, Seoul, 160 (Swest-dong-dong-dong), and then cut off the victim’s property in front of the exit area of 2:00,000 won, the victim’s market value was 50,000,000,000 won. The J stolen the victim’s property in the manner of viewing the network in the vicinity.

E. At around March 10, 2017, 19:13, in collaboration with J and B, the Defendant discovered the victim’s galthopt 5 mobile phone in front of Gangnam-gu Seoul N on the street, the market value of which is the victim’s possession within the galthopt 28 years of age, was 1,00,000 won, and deducted the victim’s galthopt 5 mobile phone, depending on the victim’s behind it, and J and B stolen the victim’s property by viewing the neighboring network.

F. At around 19:30 on March 10, 2017, the Defendant, in collaboration with J and B, discovered a 990,00 won-on 7 mobile phone at the market price of the victim Q Q (the age of 25) in front of the Gangnam-gu Seoul P on the street, and deducted the victim from the victim’s post, and the J and B jointly stolen the victim by viewing the neighboring network.

G. At around 19:00 on February 15, 2017, the Defendant discovered the fact that there was a gallue S6 mobile phone in an amount equivalent to KRW 900,000,00,00 in the market value of the victim’s ownership on the left side of the modern department store located near the Seo-gu Seoul, Seo-gu, Seoul, Seoul, 83, and stolen the said mobile phone from the victim’s main machine using a dalluous gap in the victim’s attention distributed.

H. On March 17, 2017, around 19:39, the Defendant discovered the fact that there is a 7 mobile phone at the victim's own price of the victim's own 700,000 won at the same time, and then accessed the victim's back to the victim's back, and then cut off the above mobile phone from the victim's main machine by using the difference in the victim's attention distributed.

I. On March 17, 2017, around 19:43, the Defendant discovered the fact that there was a galthal lusium 90,000 won of the market value of the victim owned by the victim, and accessed the victim's behind it, using the difference in the victim's attention distributed, the Defendant cut off the above mobile phone that was kept together with the galthal Samsung Card and Hyundai Card at the market price in the above mobile phone case.

(j) On March 17, 2017, around 19:50 on March 17, 2017, the Defendant discovered the fact that there was a gallonian 4 mobile phone at the market price of the victim’s 700,000,000 won on the part of the victim’s Sheet in front of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul (Y, 34 years old) and accessed the victim’s back, and then cut off the said mobile phone from the victim’s main machine by using the difference in the victim’s distributed attention.

As a result, the defendant was sentenced to punishment twice or more habitually due to larceny, and again attempted to steal or steal the mobile phone of the victims again within three years after the execution of the sentence was completed.

2. Defendant B’s special larceny

Defendant B, along with the Gangnam Station A and J, colored the subject of the crime at many places including the Gangnam Station A and then A play the role of taking the cell phone out from the victim’s money, and during that period, Defendant B and J shared their roles to view the network and conspired to steal the cell phone as a prompt and retailing method.

A. On March 10, 2017, at around 19:13, 2017, A discovered a galthopt 5 mobile phone in the market value of the victim’s galthopt in the front of Gangnam-gu Seoul N, which was the victim’s 28 years old, in the galths of the victim’s (the victim’s galthum). The victim’s property was stolen by combining the victim’s galthopt 1,00,000 won following the victim’s back, and Defendant J and B jointly stolen the victim’s property,

B. On March 10, 2017, at around 19:30 on March 10, 2017, A discovered a cellphone 7 mobile phone equivalent to KRW 990,00,00 at the market price of the victim Q (n, 25 years of age) in front of the Gangnam-gu Seoul P, the victim’s cell phone located in Q (n, and 90,000 won). Defendant J and B jointly stolen the victim’s property by combining it with the method of viewing the neighboring network.

A summary of the steam

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. An interrogation protocol of the police against X;

1. Statement of the police about Y;

1. Each written statement of 0, Qua, Z, AA, AB, AC, L, M, F, AD, AE, AF, and I;

1. A written statement of each victim of W, U, R and S;

1. A photograph by cutting CCTV images;

1. Investigation report (a specific case A), investigation report (a specific case of a suspected suspect J)

1. Report on internal investigation (in the event of a crime committed by a person under suspicion, inquiry into CCTV and a person prior to the same criminal records as the criminal records);

1. Investigation report (specific suspect);

1. Investigation report (The investigation of CCTV around the scene of victims U and the tracking of suspects);

1. Previous convictions held against Defendant A: Criminal history records, etc., investigation reports (report on the confirmation of the period of repeated crimes A), investigation reports (Binding of criminal records of a suspect A) and criminal investigation reports (Binding of criminal records of the same kind A);

1. Habitualness of the judgment against Defendant A: A person has been punished for the same kind of crime, such as a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and commits each of the instant crimes under the same several Acts within the period of repeated crime after release from the facility, etc. as stated in its reasoning;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

(a) Defendant A: Article 5-4(6) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 329, 331(2), 342, and 329 of the Criminal Act (generality)

B. Defendant B: Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Defendant A: Article 35 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant B: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (in the case of concurrent crimes with the punishment prescribed for special larceny of victims Qua with the heavier punishment)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendant B: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (Consideration of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing below)

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant B: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Resumed of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing below)

Reasons for sentencing

1. As to Defendant A

(a) The scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to 3 years up to 50 years; and

(b) Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria;

【Scope of Recommendation】

The basic area (2 to 4 years) of the thief under the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (Habitual thief) (2 to 2 years)

【Special Convicted Person】

(c) Determination of sentence;

Defendant has already been punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime, such as a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes. Nevertheless, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes from January 22, 2017 to January 22, 2017, which was only 18 days after having been released from prison on January 4, 2017, and was also committed a repeated crime due to the same crime. Furthermore, the risk of recidivism is very serious. Moreover, the Defendant did not recover from damage. In full view of these circumstances, the number of crimes, the number of crimes, the degree of damage, etc. need to strictly punish the Defendant.

However, the Defendant was dead to commit the instant crime and is against the Defendant. On January 4, 2017, the Defendant resulted in the instant crime due to economic difficulties after being released from prison.

In addition, in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment as ordered shall be determined in the same manner as the sentencing of the defendant.

2. As to Defendant B

(a) Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment for not less than six months to not more than seven years; and

(b) Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria;

【Scope of Recommendation】

Type 3 (Large thief) mitigated area (one year from June to one year) for general property

[Special Mitigation] In the event that there is a reason to take special account of the commission of a crime

(c) Determination of sentence;

Although the Defendant was guilty of the same offense, the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes in collusion with A, J, and then committed the instant crimes. In addition, the Defendant did not completely recover from damage.

However, the Defendant was committed during and against the instant crime. The Defendant was punished for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. in 1994, and did not commit the instant crime until the time of the instant crime. From around 2004, the Defendant served as a building security guard for about 13 years. It was difficult for the Defendant to pay a fine of one million won economically due to the failure to receive monthly salary at around the time of the instant crime. Under such circumstances, A recommended several times to commit the instant crime, and the Defendant continued to refuse to commit the instant crime, and eventually led to the instant crime. However, the degree of the Defendant’s participation is extremely minor, and the profits earned by the Defendant are merely KRW 300,000.

In addition, in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the punishment as ordered shall be determined in the same manner as the sentencing of the defendant.

Judges Kim Gin-han

Support for judges' organization