2018Gohap257 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny)

A

An assistant inspector, or a second-time trial;

Attorney Kim Jong-hwan (Korean National Assembly Line)

January 14, 2019

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

Criminal History Office

On August 10, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. (thth th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th

At around 02:50 on January 18, 2018, the Defendant habitually stolen the Defendant’s “Down”, which is the victim’s 140,000 won in cash, which is the victim’s possession of the place of an entertainment drinking club in the Kabter, and 3,910 won in 140,000 in cash, which is the victim’s possession of the place of an entertainment drinking club, and 200,000 won in e-mail card, and 1,000 won in e-mail card.

Accordingly, the defendant was sentenced to punishment twice or more for the crime of larceny, etc., and habitually stolen another person's property within three years after the execution of the punishment was completed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Protocols of seizure and list of seizure (number 5, 6, 11, 12) of each police;

1. The photograph of each seized article (number 7, 13), photograph of the suspect at the time of arrest, photograph of the suspect, photograph of the suspect, and photograph of the place where the damaged article is discovered;

1. Each police investigation report (number 10, 18);

1. CCTV video CDs;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal history records, etc. and investigation reports by the prosecution;

1. Habituality of the judgment: The defendant has been punished several times by habitually entering a place where unspecified persons are allowed to travel, such as churches, PCs and singing stores, and according to CCTV images marked on the face of the crime, the defendant does not take any goods left in the place on the singer box, but brought about handbags on the inside and outside of the singer, after taking cash and cards, etc. in the bags immediately after committing the crime, and then leaving the handbags in the bags separate collection place, and the defendant committed the larceny of this case at the time two years have not passed since the release date, and there is no special circumstance to steal other goods in addition to the habit of the thief.

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 5-4(6) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 329 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act [Article 35 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) has been committed on February 25, 2016]

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Articles 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act)

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. Summary of the assertion

The Defendant, who had been living in the place where the instant crime was committed, d'D Sing’, had d's degree of 5 illness of a mixed person, and d's singing in the above singing room, and d's singing in the instant case. The Defendant committed the instant crime under the condition of mental disorder or mental disorder.

2. Determination

On January 18, 2018, the Defendant’s face at around 06:00, which was arrested by the police, is recognized as being in a superior condition, but the time and circumstances of the above superior condition are unclear; the Defendant’s assertion that her wife is snicked or drinking in his residence is difficult to believe; there is no circumstance to deem that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on CCTV images recorded on the face of the crime; and other circumstances after the crime, etc. do not seem to have reached a state where the Defendant had no or weak ability to distinguish things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime in this case. The Defendant’s above assertion is rejected.

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for not less than one year and not more than six months but not more than 25 years;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] thief under the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (Habitual thief)

[Special Convictd Persons] Reductions: Non-Mitigation of Punishment

[Determination of the Recommendation Area] Reduction Area

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of not less than one year and six months, but not more than three years;

3. Determination of sentence;

Although the Defendant had had been sentenced several times for the same kind of crime, the Defendant again committed the instant crime again during the repeated crime period. The Defendant had been detained while evading the sentence for several months after the closing of the instant argument.

○ favorable circumstances: The instant crime was committed once, and the victim expressed his intention not to be punished.

In addition, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, family environment, motive of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime.

The presiding judge, the Full Judge Line

Judges Kang Jin-han

Judges Do Residents-ho