2012 Highly 20 Robberys, thief

장ㅇㅇ ( 66 - 1 ), ㅇㅇ

Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Geumcheon-gu Seoul District Office

Goin (Lawsuits) and Jeon Byung-ju (Public Trial)

Attorney Mental Dong-dong (Korean National Assembly Line)

March 9, 2012

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Search and seizure 76No. 76 (Evidence No. 1) and face-to-face 1,00 square meters (Evidence No. 5) shall be confiscated.

Facts of crime

1. Attempts to robbery;

The Defendant used the exemption of water used in a usual manner to return to his living room, caused others to lose his food, and had others receive money and valuables from him.

피고인은 2012. 1. 7. 02 : 19경 서울 금천구 ㅇㅇ 동 ㅇㅇㅇ - ㅇ에 있는 ㅇㅇ 편의점에서, 그곳에서 일하던 종업원 피해자 이ㅇㅇ ( 25세 ) 에게 접근하여 미리 준비한 수면제 4알을 탄 핫초코 1컵을 피해자에게 마시도록 하였지만, 피해자가 의식을 잃지 않고 계속하여 일하였다 .

Accordingly, the Defendant had been forced to withdraw money by the above method, but did not bring about such intent and did not commit an attempted crime.

2. Larceny;

피고인은 같은 날 03 : 48경 위 ㅇㅇㅇ편의점에서, 위 피해자가 화장실에 가면서 계산대를 비운 틈을 이용하여 그 곳 계산기 안에 있는 현금 160만 원 상당을 가지고 가 이를 절취하였다 .

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. 이ㅇㅇ에 대한 검찰 진술조서

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. Each investigation report (in relation to attachment of photographs of seized articles, exemption from collection, CCTV analysis report at convenience stores, etc.);

1. Application of each existing Act and subordinate statute of 76 No. 76 (No. 1) and face-to-face 1,00 square meters (Evidence No. 5);

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 342 and 333 of the Criminal Act (the attempted charge of robbery, Selection of Imprisonment) and Article 329 of the Criminal Act (the point of larceny and Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Statutory mitigation;

Articles 25(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (Crime of Attempted and Attempted Robbery)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes to the extent that Punishment is aggregated with the punishment prescribed by the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Robbery)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances in favor of the reasons for sentencing)

1. Confiscation;

The reason for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act [the scope of applicable sentences] : Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than 8 months but not more than 6 months and not more than 10 months;

[Judgment of the sentence] The crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, who failed to force the payment of money and valuables by means of planned exemption, and thereby stolen the money and valuables using the gap in the victim's place, and the nature of the crime is not good. In addition, prior to the crime of this case, the Defendant has been punished several times for the crime of larceny, robbery, injury by robbery, etc., and thus, the Defendant should be punished with severe punishment.

However, in consideration of the fact that the defendant under an agreement with the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, the defendant is led to the crime of this case in order to escape from the poor family status, and the defendant is in a position to support self-support born between the wife of Vietnam and that there may be an increase in the burden on the dependent if the period of punishment expires, one year shall be sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor within the scope of punishment subject to statutory mitigation and discretionary mitigation.

Judges Kim Yong-hoon

Judges Jeon Sung-sung

Judges Park Sung-Nam-