A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Seized evidence 5 or 13 shall be confiscated.

No. 10, 11, 12, seized evidence.

Punishment of the crime

On February 23, 2006, the Defendant sent juvenile protection cases by larceny, etc. from the Daegu District Prosecutors' Office to the Busan District Prosecutors' Office on May 8, 2006, sent juvenile protection cases by larceny, etc. from the Daegu District Prosecutors' Office on June 27, 2006, sent juvenile protection cases by the Daegu District Prosecutors' Office on March 19, 2009, sent juvenile protection cases by violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to the Daegu District Court's Support on March 19, 2009, and sent juvenile protection cases by violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to the Daegu High Court on January 27, 2011, and completed the execution of the sentence on April 22, 2013.

On October 21, 2013, at around 01:00, the Defendant: (a) intruded inside the office through the first floor window on which the victim E (the 33 years old) did not open the office to the office; and (b) stolen the cash owned by the victim in a simplified safe and a book-to-book.

In addition, from that time until November 29, 2013, the Defendant stolen the total amount of KRW 1,417,650 over 16 times, as shown in the attached list of crimes.

Accordingly, the defendant habitually stolen another's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each copy of the E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N,O, P, and Q's written statements and R;

1. Reports on the results of field identification, and fingerprints assessment results at each criminal scene;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. A report on investigation (Attachment of photographs of the scene of autopsy and photographs of damaged articles), report on investigation (Attachment of photographs of damaged articles), and report on investigation (Attachment of written appraisal);

1. Previous records before ruling: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (Binding a copy of the same type of force decisions), investigation reports (current status of acceptance by a suspect A);

1. Habituality of the judgment: The application of the dampness Act is 1.0% in light of the fact that each of the criminal records stated in the judgment was repeated 16 times for the crime of the same veterinary method, as stated in the judgment of the court below.