2018Gohap885 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bribery recognized)

Habitual thief

A

Kim Jin-young (Court of Appeals) and Kim Chang-seop (Court of Justice)

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

November 9, 2018

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

In the case of the seized Thailand 20 U.S.T. 3(No. 1), the victim C shall return to the victim Samsung Talgallon 3(No. 2) respectively.

Criminal 1)

【Criminal Power】

On September 24, 2004, the Defendant was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court. On August 12, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime in the same court. On September 7, 2016, the same court was sentenced to 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for habitual larceny and completed the execution of the sentence in the Seoul Southern Prison on January 15, 2018.

【Criminal Facts】

At around 16:00 on March 19, 2018, the Defendant stolen the property worth KRW 9,532,000 in total 15 times during the period from August 20, 2018 to August 20, 2018, where the victim’s 'G' operated by the victim F of the victim F of the Doo-dong E-dong 24-3 of Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu Seoul E-dong Building A, the victim took 1,00,00 won in cash owned by the victim and 1,00,000 won in cash located under his/her locked.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. An interrogation protocol of the accused by the prosecution (written two times);

1. Each statement prepared by H, I, J, K, C, F, L, M, N, D, P, Q, R, and S: Each investigation report (No. 2, 3, 14, 17, 42 in the order), internal investigation report (No. 21, 25 in the order), each CCTV-capf photograph, site photograph, and CD video data;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Previous convictions in the judgment: In light of the fact that the defendant commits the larceny repeatedly at least 15 months, even though he/she had been sentenced several times as a larceny, he/she committed the larceny under the same several Acts and subordinate statutes, even though he/she had been sentenced to several times as a larceny, he/she is found to have committed such larceny;

Application of Statutes

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

Articles 332 and 329 (General Provisions) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act

1. Return to a victim;

1. Scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than nine years;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of thief] Type 2 (General thief) for thief in general property

[Special Aggravationd Persons] Aggravationd: Cases of the same repeated crime not falling under the specific crime Aggravated Punishment (Cumulative Offense) and habitual crimes;

[Scope of Recommendation] From 10 months to 3 years (Special Aggravation)

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment for 2 years; and

The Defendant had been sentenced four times to imprisonment for the same kind of crime, and was habitually committed the instant crime without being able to do so during the period of repeated crime. The frequency and amount of the crime, and most of the damage were not recovered. The Defendant was not able to receive a letter from the victims.

The circumstances favorable to ○: The Defendant has led to confession and reflect all of the crimes of this case.

○ Other factors of sentencing as ordered shall be comprehensively considered in light of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. and all the factors of sentencing as shown in the oral proceedings.

The presiding judge, the Full Judge Line

Judges Kang Jin-han

Judges Do Residents-ho

1) To the extent that it does not disadvantage the Defendant’s exercise of the right of defense, it can be admitted through the examination of evidence without amendment procedures.

was ex officio based on facts.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.