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

Punishment of the crime

At around 03:30 on September 2013, the Defendant: (a) went to a cafeteria operated by the victim D in Gyeonggi-gun, Gyeonggi-gun; (b) went to the said cafeteria through the open windows located adjacent to the entrance of the said cafeteria; and (c) went to the said cafeteria by having one swine container, which was in cash, 700,000 won owned by the victim who was in custody in the said cafeteria; and (d) went to the said cafeteria.

The Defendant habitually stolen or attempted to steals property worth approximately KRW 2,012,00,000, in total, from November 24, 2013 to November 24, 2013, as indicated in the list of crimes, respectively, throughout 11 times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made by the police against D or F;

1. Written statements of G, H, I, and J;

1. Written expert evidence of salvance;

1. On-site photographs;

1. A written appraisal of the site;

1. Photographs of the damaged site;

1. A written appraisal;

1. Investigation report (the CCTV investigation made around the site);

1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes recognizing dampness in light of the method of crime, frequency of crime, and the fact that the same kind of crime has been committed in a short period of time and repeatedly;

1. Article 5-4 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the Articles 330 and 342 of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts, and Articles 5-4 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that Defendant 207 violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (i.e., imprisonment with prison labor for a term of one year and six months) was sentenced, and there is a criminal record having been sentenced to a fine of two million won as a result of larceny in around 2013 even after the said punishment was discharged from the prison. In full view of the following, it is inevitable to sentence comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) a criminal record was sentenced to a fine of two million won as a result of larceny in around 2013; (b) a re-influence

However, the fact that the defendant confessions and reflects the crime, and the risk of the act of entering places other than indoor residence is relatively little.