logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 논산지원 2018.05.15 2018고단2
상습절도
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On December 10, 2004, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 500,00,000 as a fine for larceny from the Suwon Franchisor, and on September 26, 2008, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 2 million as a fine for larceny. On December 26, 2008, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a punishment for larceny. On November 15, 2013, the Defendant applied for a suspended sentence of KRW 1 year and six months on September 30, 2016 for a retrial on the ground of a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny) in the Suwon Franchisor Support, which was sentenced to a suspended sentence of KRW 1 year and six months on September 30, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 8, 2016 and became final and conclusive on October 26, 2016.

On June 2, 2017, at around 11:50, the Defendant stolen foodstuffs worth KRW 413,180,00 in total nine times from Jun. 2, 2017 to Aug. 2, 2017, as indicated in the list of crimes in attached Table, including hiding 2, etc. of the market price of KRW 76,00,00, in E stores in E stores in the Group D controlled by the Victim C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made to F, C, G, H, I, and J;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of screen pictures and videos for committing a crime);

1. Protocols of seizure (voluntary submission), list of seizure, and search and seizure photographs;

1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes recognizing dampness in light of the records of each crime, the number of crimes, the frequency of crimes, and the repeated crimes of the same kind in the judgment;

1. Article 332 of the Criminal Act and Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act and the selection of fines concerning the crime;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. As to the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the order of provisional payment, the Defendant and the defense counsel had been in a mental and physical state due to mental illness, such as symptoms before and after the birth of the Defendant at the time of committing the instant crime

The argument is asserted.

However, the records of this case are examined.

arrow