logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.10 2013고합229
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On July 28, 2005, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Seoul Central District Court on June 11, 2007. On July 3, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in the Busan East District Court on July 3, 2009, and was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in the Seoul East District Court on May 7, 201.

1. On April 1, 2012, around 06:00, the victim E who was divingd in the Dracks or the surface of the water in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, by discovering the victim E and making use of the gaps in which surveillance is neglected, brought him to the above E, and took him back the clothes gate as the said key, and took 200,000 won in cash in the said E, which was in his possession.

2. On January 3, 2013, at around 05:00, the victim H who was divingd in G Dogs or water surface room located in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, by discovering the victim H and taking advantage of the gaps in surveillance negligence, brought him to the escape room and opened the clothes room as the said key, and took 380,000 won in cash owned by the said H in that room.

3. Around 16:34 February 23, 2013, J-si located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government I: (a) discovered and checked the Victim K in the Internet game at that place; and (b) carried out a paper room consisting of 1 punishment, 1 punishment, 1 punishment, 1 punishment, 2 punishment, etc. of the total market value of the above K’s holding market value of KRW 180,000,000, which was placed on the floor by taking advantage of the gaps in which surveillance was neglected.

Accordingly, the defendant habitually stolen another's property three times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of K;

1. Each statement of H and E;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Previous records: Criminal history records and other inquiry reports, and results of search for prisoners released from prison;

1. Habituality: A criminal defendant has the same criminal record as the first head stated in his/her judgment.

arrow