A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On June 27, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in the Seoul Eastern District Court on one year and six months, and on June 4, 2014, the Defendant had 13 times the same criminal records.

The defendant was in a state that he lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the Compilation mental fission.

On September 17, 2014, at around 14:25, the Defendant stolen the cash amounting to KRW 400,000,000 owned by the victim from the wall wall located in the UA to provide meals to the victim E at the “D” clothing store of the first floor of the Seoul Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building 39.

Accordingly, the defendant habitually stolen the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Investigation report (suspect CCTV photographs);

1. Evidence photographs;

1. Previous records: Criminal history records, etc. inquiry reports, investigation reports (verification of the date of release of a suspect, previous records, and attachment of judgment);

1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the larceny shall be recognized in view of the repeated criminal records, criminal acts, and criminal acts of the same kind in the judgment;

1. Relevant Article 332 of the Criminal Act and Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 10(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for the mitigation of mental and physical illness is that the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months at the Seoul East Eastern District Court on June 27, 2013 for the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and sentenced on June 4, 2014; at the time when the execution of the sentence was completed and the repeated crime was not completed for four months, the sentence is inevitable to commit the crime in this case during the repeated crime period; and there is a high possibility of social criticism; however, the damage was recovered; the victim expressed his/her intent not to be punished against the Defendant on October 29, 2014; and the Defendant’s age and age.