The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

evidence of seizure.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, who has not been physically and mentally weak, committed each of the crimes in this case under a state of mental and physical weakness due to a habitive disorder, shock control disorder, etc.

B. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, one year of confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination ex officio as to attempted larceny among the facts charged in the instant case

A. On October 22, 2016, the Defendant: (a) entered the Victim F Haak-gu, Gwangjubuk-gu, about 00:58, the Defendant attempted to steal the Victim F’s U.S. disturbance in custody; (b) however, the Defendant failed to commit an attempted crime, even if the dogs observed therein were to prevent the disturbance of the Victim F from spreading.

B. (1) The time to commence the commission of larceny of the relevant legal doctrine ought to be deemed to be the time when the commission of larceny of another person begins to commit an act closely which infringes on the de facto control of another person with respect to the property, and thus, not at night, intrudes upon another person’s residence for

Even before commencement of the act of larcenying articles, the crime of intrusion is established only, and cannot be deemed to have commenced the commission of larceny. Therefore, it is not an attempted crime of larceny.

( 대법원 1992. 9. 8. 선고 92도 1650 판결) 2) 판단 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하면, 피고인이 이 부분 공소사실 기재 일시 장소에 이르러, 난초 재배하우스 바깥에 설치된 cctv에 스프레이를 뿌려 cctv가 보이지 않도록 손괴하고, 그 곳을 지키고 있던 개가 피고인을 향해 짖자 위 개에게 스프레이를 뿌리고, 위 하우스 주변을 맴돌며 절취할 기회를 노리다가 개가 계속 해서 짖자 그대로 도주한 사실을 인정할 수 있다.

In this case, Defendant’s above act was prosecuted for attempted larceny under Article 329 of the Criminal Act, not for attempted larceny at night under Article 330 of the Criminal Act, but for attempted larceny under Article 329 of the Criminal Act, whether Defendant was the commencement of the commission of larceny was stolen.