A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On September 17, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Ulsan District Court on September 17, 201, and completed the execution of the sentence in the Busan Correctional Institution on June 1, 2011.

On January 29, 2014, at around 10:36, the Defendant opened a gate at the E office operated by the victim D in Ulsan Jung-gu, Ulsan-gu, and intruded into the gate, and used the electric cable and the electric room room with an amount of KRW 600,000,000 in the market price of the victim’s possession at that place, and stolen it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. Photographss, such as the scene of the crime, and CCTV photographs for the suspect;

1. Previous convictions: Application of a reply to criminal records and investigation reports (report on criminal suspects' repeated crimes and reports on the facts of the same kind of crimes);

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, and Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of intrusion upon a structure and the choice of imprisonment) concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. From among concurrent offenders, the sentencing criteria for the reasons for the sentencing of the punishment under the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment] [the grounds for sentencing] for general property [the special mitigation range (4-1-1-6 months)] [in the case of intrusion upon a living-type crime or a place other than an indoor residential space (4-type], a criminal conviction who was punished for having committed the same kind of crime (4-type) and committed the same crime outside the indoor residential space (4-type]. In addition, while the repeated crime is being committed, it is committed during the period of repeated crime, and it is deemed that the summary order was notified at a time similar to the crime of this case and it is inevitable to sentence without any extenuating circumstance.

Provided, That the defendant's mistake is against the defendant, and the victim collects the stolen product, and the punishment shall be determined as per the order in consideration of the circumstances.