A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 3, 2018, the Defendant entering a residence intrusion around 07:32 on September 3, 2018, the Defendant entered the victim’s residence in Gwangju-si building B and the victim’s D, and entered the password of the joint signature, which had been known in advance, with no place in the house, and entered the victim’s house’s residence via open door, and then entered the victim’s house door password, which was known to the victim’s wife E, and went through the open door, and invaded the victim’s residence.

From around that time to October 4, 2018, the Defendant invadedd the residence of the said victim by the same method 11 times in total, as shown in attached Table 1.

2. On September 10, 2018, at around 07:29, the Defendant: (a) invadedd the victim D’s residence, as described in paragraph (1); and (b) opened the victim D’s house, as soon as possible, up to be beer; and (c) placed 2,000 women’s panty panty over a total of KRW 12,00 in the market price owned by the victim; and (d) stolen the victim.

From around that time to September 2018, the Defendant stolen the property of the victim by the same method four times in total, as shown in attached Table 2.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement regarding D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning analysis and photographs of video recording data;

1. Relevant statutory provisions Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (each thief), and Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (each thief), and choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. 집행유예 형법 제62조 제1항 양형의 이유 이 사건 범행은 과거관계를 잊지 못한 채 피해자 주변을 맴돌며 반복적으로 무단으로 주거에 침입하고 재물을 절취한 범행으로서 피해자의 정신적 피해를 고려하면 엄벌의 필요성이 있는 점은 불리한 정상이다.

However, there is no significant damage to property, confessions and reflects, and criminal records exceeding fines.