On June 9, 2016, at around 15:13, 2016, the Defendant passed the gate by using the key on the front line of the entrance, and intruded the residence of the victim by using the key on the front line of the entrance, and stolen USD 179,00,00,000, the market price of the victim who was under custody on the west, was one half of the total market price of the 200,000,000 won, and USD 179,000,000,000,000,000 won, which was under custody on the west.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the draft D;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment (absent point, a choice of imprisonment), and Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (absent point of intrusion upon residence and choice of imprisonment);

1. Grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act, as the punishment for concurrent crimes;

1. The scope of punishment recommended on the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment] and the mitigated area (from August to January to June) of the mitigated area (the special mitigated person] of general property;

2. Although there was a past record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime in which the sentence was sentenced three times (one time of actual sentence, two times of suspended sentence), the crime of this case is committed again, under the unfavorable circumstances that the defendant did not recover from damage, the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects his mistake, and the facts constituting a living penalty shall be considered under favorable circumstances, and the punishment shall be determined as ordered, taking into account all the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case, such as the age, sex behavior, environment, motive of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.