The number of crimes committed in cases of habitual special larceny, habitual special larceny, habitual intrusion upon residence at night, and habitual larceny;

If the facts of special larceny of 3 times from September 5, 1974 to 22:00 on September 26, 1974, which were committed from 03:0 to 22:00 on September 26, 1974, the facts of special larceny of 2 times, the facts of nighttime larceny of 1 time, and the facts of larceny of 1 time are deemed to have been habitually repeated, it is reasonable to view that, among these cases, the statutory penalty of 1 time is the most severe crime and only one crime is the same.

Defendant

Attorney Park Dong-dong (Korean National Assembly)

Jeonju District Court Decision 74No1199 delivered on March 14, 1975

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined by the defense counsel. The defendant does not submit the appellate brief.

According to the facts charged in this case, the defendant's special larceny on September 5, 1974 from 03:0 to 2:00 on September 26, 1974, 22:200, 3 times, 2 times, 1, and 1, and 1, 4 times of habitual special larceny, habitual special larceny, habitual larceny, and habitual larceny, and 6 times of habitual larceny are considered as 4 times of habitual larceny. The court below also accepted the same opinion of the prosecutor and ruled that there is a substantial concurrent crime among 6 times of habitual larceny. However, if it can be seen that 7 times of this case are repeated, it is reasonable to view that only one crime is established by comprehensively covering the remainder of the crime of habitual larceny, the statutory punishment of which is most severe. If it is dealt with according to the opinion of the prosecutor and prosecutor, it is reasonable to view that there is a balance between 6 times and 6 times of special larceny.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in accordance with Article 397 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the case shall be remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division of the court below.

This decision is consistent with the opinions of the involved judges.

Justices Han-jin (Presiding Justice)