[criminal record] On May 28, 199, the defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of suspended execution due to special larceny, etc. at the Incheon District Court, and on November 25, 1999, the defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) at the same court, and the sentence of suspended execution became final and conclusive on January 12, 200.

On March 18, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor or three years of suspended execution due to special larceny, etc. in the same court, and on April 20, 2017, the same court was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor due to habitual night intrusion larceny, larceny, etc. in the same court, and became final and conclusive on August 24, 2017, and the said suspended execution became void.

On August 16, 2019, the Defendant completed the final execution of the sentence in the Innju prison.

[2] On September 10, 2020, around 20:30 on September 10, 2020, the Defendant removed a crime prevention window installed on the window of the bath room in the Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City’s residence, and intruded into the ward, and subsequently, 400 won in the 200 foot-to-land, which is the victim’s ownership, and stolen it.

As a result, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment not less than three times for larceny, and again destroyed a part of the structure at night and intruded into another’s residence, and stolen the victim’s property.

Summary of Evidence

1. A statement prepared by the defendant court D and a written statement prepared by C, on-site photograph and investigation report (or relative to the victim), respectively;

1. Previous conviction: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation situation (verification of criminal history and change of the name of a crime), each judgment and inquiry (a result of investigation of evidence is deemed to have a mental disorder to a certain extent at the time of the crime, but it does not seem that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to such mental disorder in light of the criminal history, means and methods, circumstances before and after the crime, etc.).