The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.

one certificate issued by the seizured Raber.

1. The reasoning of the appeal is that of the lower court.

2. The judgment defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had a record of punishment several times for the same kind of crime.

There are not a lot of frequency of crimes, and the contents of crimes are also not good due to theft that intrudes upon the residence of victims.

Even if the court below takes into account factors favorable to the defendant, the sentence of the court below shall be light.

3. Conclusion, pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and the following judgment shall be rendered again after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the crime and evidence against the defendant recognized by the court is identical to the corresponding column of the original judgment, and thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 332, 342, 330, and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment (an attempted habitual larceny) and Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (each intrusion upon residence and choice of imprisonment);

1. The former part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes;

1. For habitual offenders (person subject to special mitigation) who suffer from mitigated areas (one to two years), such as mitigated areas (one to two years), and habitual crimes (special mitigation areas) who live in a livelihood / habitual crimes, the reason for sentencing under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment] general property;