A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Criminal facts

On February 18, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and ten months in Busan District Court due to a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., and completed the execution of the sentence on May 7, 2012. On May 7, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to one year to imprisonment for habitual larceny at the Seoul High Court on September 25, 2015, and completed the execution of the sentence at the Seoul High Court on March 25, 2015. On March 25, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for habitual larceny at the Seoul Central District Court on March 26, 2017, and completed the execution of the sentence at the Seoul High Court on January 26, 2017.

1. On May 24, 2018, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) committed by the victim B around 14:19, the Defendant carried out the victim’s goods, such as the attached list of crimes, on nine occasions from June 16, 2017 to March 18, 2019, with the cash amount of KRW 300,000,000, which the victim had been kept in the victim’s lusium in the “D” store on the first floor of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building C, which was operated by the victim B.

As a result, the defendant was sentenced to punishment twice or more due to larceny, etc., and again stolen the victims' property within three years after the execution of the punishment was completed.

2. On March 18, 2019, the Defendant was arrested in flagrant offender No. 9 of the annexed crime list in the “F” located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E on March 12:20, and the Defendant was required to present an identification card upon the receipt of a flagrant offender from H during the police box belonging to the Seoul Hypo Police Station.

The defendant presented the driver's license under the name of the commissioner of the Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency, which is an official document in possession, as if he was his driver's license.

Accordingly, the defendant did not use official documents.