Whether habitual storage of stolen goods is recognized where stolen goods have been stored at least eight times between one year and six months with the knowledge of the fact that they are stolen from a male living together (negative)

The crime of habitual storage stipulated in Article 5-4 (4) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes refers to cases where a person who has a habit of habitual storage of stolen property commits the crime, and the defendant repeatedly keeps stolen property eight times in a short period, but there is no criminal record related to stolen property prior to that, and a man living together with him/her is deemed to keep stolen property at his/her own request with dolusent awareness of the fact that it is a stolen property. In light of the above, it is difficult to conclude that the crime of habitual storage of stolen property by the defendant was due to the outbreak of the habit.

[1] Articles 5-4(4), 362(1), and 363(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

Defendant

Attorney Kim Jong-hee

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

64 days during the period of detention before the judgment is rendered shall be included in the above sentence.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

On March 13, 1991, the Defendant received a request from Nonindicted 1 at the office of the Defendant located in the Namcheon-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-do, that he stolen from Nonindicted 1, to keep one pentsamer, one gate, one gate, one gate, and one gate, etc. which he stolen at that time, and kept the stolen goods upon being aware that it is an stolen object, and then kept the stolen goods at the Defendant’s office eight times as described in the attached list of crimes by August 13, 1992. The Defendant received a request from Nonindicted 1 to request the custody of each of the items described in the same list that he stolen from Nonindicted 1 during eight times as indicated in the attached list of crimes. The Defendant, upon being aware that it was an stolen object, received it and kept each of the stolen goods at the Defendant’s office with the knowledge that it was an stolen object.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement that conforms to the facts stated in this Court;

1. Each protocol of interrogation of the accused and Nonindicted Party 1 prepared by the Prosecutor, which corresponds to the facts contained in the judgment, shall be written.

1. A written self-written statement prepared by Nonindicted Party 1 that partially conforms to the facts stated in the judgment

1. Each statement that conforms to the facts stated in the judgment in each protocol of statement against Suppressions, Lee Jae-sups, pumps of water, Kim Tae-sup, Suppressions, and Kim Jong-hee in the preparation of handling affairs;

1. Each statement consistent with the judgment in the records of seizure (in pages 25 and 31 of investigation records) in the preparation of records of handling affairs by judicial police officers;

1. Each entry that conform to the facts stated in the judgment in the ledger of pawned articles (the 77 pages, No. 124 pages) bound in the investigation records;

Application of Statutes

1. Selections of the relevant laws and sentences: Article 362(1) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 5057 of Dec. 29, 1995) (amended by Act No. 5057 of Dec. 29, 199)

1.Aggravation of concurrent crimes: former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Code (Aggravated Punishment as defined in the Crime of Custody of Stolen Goods on August 13, 1992, with the largest penalty)

1. Pre-paid detention days: Article 57 of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution of sentence: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (excluding the previous convictions for a fine not exceeding one time, considering extenuating circumstances, such as the fact that there has been no previous convictions sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment, most of the damages have been recovered, and

Parts of innocence

Among the facts charged in this case, the summary of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the "the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" is that the defendant received and kept stolen stolen articles from Non-Indicted 1 with the knowledge of the fact that they were stolen, as stated in the facts charged in the judgment habitually. As such, it is hard to conclude that the crime of this case was committed by the defendant as a habitor, and that the defendant did not have any previous criminal records related to stolen articles, and that the stolen articles of this case, which were stolen by Non-Indicted 1, were kept with the awareness of the fact that they were stolen, and that they were kept with the knowledge of the fact that they were stolen. Thus, the crime of this case was committed by the non-Indicted 1 with the knowledge of the fact that they were stolen, and thus, it is hard to conclude that the crime of this case was done with the habitor, and there is no other evidence to prove that the crime of this case was habitually stored within the scope of the crime under the latter part of Article 5-4 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

The Constitution of the Republic of Korea within the jurisdiction of judges (Presiding Judge)