beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the legal principle, the defendant cannot be deemed to have a habit of larceny.
B. The lower court’s imprisonment (one year and six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant committed the larceny of this case at the time when several months have not passed since he was released from office on May 18, 201, and the defendant committed the larceny of this case at the time when he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment in 2010, a fine of one million won for a suspended sentence of imprisonment and a fine of one million won for a special larceny in 2012, a fine of three million won for a suspended sentence of imprisonment in 2013, a fine of six million won for a criminal punishment of larceny in 2013, a majority of the criminal facts of the above previous offense committed the larceny of this case, which are similar to a PC bank or restaurant, and the criminal defendant committed the larceny of this case at the time when he was released from office on May 18, 2014.
B. The Defendant’s mistake is divided, part of the damaged goods appears to be back to the victims, and the amount of damage is relatively large. However, the statutory penalty for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny) is “a life imprisonment or imprisonment with prison labor for not less than three years” and the lower court sentenced the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum period of one year and six months within the scope of the punishment mitigated by discretionary mitigation, and in full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, criminal background, and circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be said that the sentence imposed by the lower court is heavy.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.