A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant sentenced, at the Daegu District Court on November 29, 2001, one year and six months to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, at the Seoul Northern District Court on July 15, 2003, two years of imprisonment for the same crime at the Seoul Northern District Court on March 15, 2006, and three years of imprisonment for the same crime at the Seoul Northern District Court on March 15, 2006, and the execution of the final sentence was completed on February 20, 209, habitually, from around 22:30 on April 27, 2009 to around 09:30 on April 28, 2009 to the “E” restaurant operated by the victim C at the Government of the Republic of Korea on April 27, 2009, and then intruded the inside restaurant through the inside cafeteria, with one cash storage and five thousand cash storage and five cash source containing the amount of cash deposit on the Kater.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Photographs photographs of the damaged site, E-book-type photographs of the remains, and photographs of suspect trends (related to visit places of damage);

1. On-site reports, a report on damage notification, requests for an on-site fingerprint appraisal, and verification of personal information on theft cases;

1. Investigation report (specific suspect as a result of the fingerprint examination);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal records and investigation reports (verification of release from court and attachment of judgment);

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

1. Article 5-4 (6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. The proviso to Article 35 and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders;

1. Determination as to the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (the following circumstances favorable to the defendant's reasons for sentencing)

1. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant, along with the Defendant’s who was living on the day of the instant case, went back to the GU and was hospitalized by the mother, and only returned to the office.