A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Seized evidence 2 shall be confiscated.

Victims of Nos. 3, 4, and 6, respectively, of seized evidence.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Daegu District Court on August 10, 2001 and was sentenced to one year and six months on December 17, 2002 to three times more of the same criminal records as other than the completion of the sentence.

On August 17, 2004, the Defendant found the E-mail vehicle owned by the victim D, which was parked at the front C in the Busan City, around 01:30 on August 17, 2004, and added the string to the window cresh by using any cresh outside the surrounding area, and then cancelled the correction device by means of cutting the 20,000 won in cash owned by the above victim, national credit card 1, El branch credit card 1, Ga branch credit card 1, Ga branch credit card 1, Ga branch credit card 1, resident registration certificate, and one driver's license.

In addition, from the above day to October 30 of the same year, the property amounting to 2,042,40 won was habitually stolen over 16 times between the above day and the above day from October 30 of the same year.

Summary of Evidence

In the case of this case where the record of the case subject to review is already destroyed due to the expiration of the preservation period and it is impossible to complete recovery of the record, the evidence of the judgment subject to review, which can be known by the remaining data collected, including the written judgment, and the value of evidence newly submitted in the retrial procedure, shall be comprehensively assessed, and the propriety of the judgment subject to review shall be newly determined (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2154, Sept. 24, 2004, etc.). 1.

1. A copy of the Daegu District Court Decision 2004 High Court Decision 7218 and one copy of the Daegu District Court Decision 2005No83 decided January 8, 2005;

1. Previous convictions in the judgment: Inquiry about criminal history and the judgment of the same military force of the defendant (the Daegu District Court 2001 High Court Order 4474);

1. Whether the defendant has habitually committed the theft of each of the instant larceny of the same kind in spite of the fact that the defendant had been punished several times for the same type of crime, and if so, it can be recognized that the defendant has repeatedly committed the theft of the same kind of crime, and that the method and frequency of the crime;

1. Articles 332, 329, and 342 (General Provisions) of the Criminal Act of this Act concerning criminal facts and choice of imprisonment.