(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.5.1. 선고 2018고합1131 판결

The Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment for habitual larceny at the Seoul Northern District Court on May 13, 2016 and the Seoul Northern District Court on June 1, 2017, and was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment by the Seoul Central District Court on July 1, 2017 and completed the execution of the sentence in the original prison on July 1, 2018 and was sentenced to 13 times more.

[Criminal facts]

The Defendant committed the following crimes under the lack of the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the increase of military wall, which is a military register due to the decline in impulse ability:

At around 16:15 on October 15, 2018, the Defendant: (a) committed a theft of the victim’s property totaling KRW 222,00,000, and KRW 500,000, a lot department store store gift certificates of KRW 100,000, in cash, by taking the victim’s front clothes at C’s front clothes store located in Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, by taking the victim’s cresh in which surveillance was neglected due to the brush of the victim’s cresh; and (b) taking the victim’s cresh around the shoulder, using the clothes in which the victim’s crush was put into the shoulder, and taking the brush back, and then taking the crush back, as indicated in [Attachment] list from September 13, 2018 to November 3, 2018.

As a result, the defendant was sentenced to two or more times due to the habitually violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and again stolen the victims' property within three years after the execution of the sentence is completed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. Each statement of F, G and H;

1. Reports on internal investigation, and perusal of CCTV images that have occurred;

1. A photograph (No. 9, 11, 23, and 31 on the evidence list), video CDs, and CDs upon each CCTV course;

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Criminal history records, inquiry reports, results of prisoner search, copies of the judgment, and current status of personal confinement;

1. Habituality of judgment: Recognition of dampness in light of the fact that there are many persons of the same kind, such as the records of each crime in the judgment, the same method of crime, and repeated crimes of the same kind within the short period;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 5-4(6) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 329 of the Criminal Act (Overall Control)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act [Article 35 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. of which the execution of punishment was completed on July 1, 2018]

1. Mitigation of mental disorders;

Articles 10(2) and 55(1)3 of the former Criminal Act (Amended by Act No. 15982, Dec. 18, 2018)

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under Acts: Imprisonment for one year and six months to twenty-five years; and

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] Types 2 of the thief Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (Habitual thief)

【Specially Exemplarys / Mitigations : A mentally ill-incompetent (no one shall be responsible for him/her), and a person not subject to punishment

[Scope of Recommendation] Special Adjustment Area, 9 months to 3 years (at least two special mitigations exist and the lower limit of the scope of punishment shall be mitigated to 1/2)

[Scope of the revised sentencing] One year and six months from six months to three years (in cases where the lower limit of the range of sentence recommended by the sentencing guidelines is inconsistent with the lower limit of the applicable sentencing guidelines, it shall be based on the lower limit of the statutory applicable sentencing range).

3. Determination of sentence;

As the Defendant had been punished several times due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, there has been no long time after being released, each of the larceny crimes of this case is not good. However, there is no good quality of the Defendant repeatedly committed at the market, etc.: Provided, That the Defendant recognized all of the larceny crimes; the Defendant committed the larceny in a state of mental disorder caused by the increase in the wall of military register; the amount of damage was not significant; the victims do not want the punishment against the Defendant; the Defendant is suffering from the brut reflectivity, etc. of both sides, and the health status is not good, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, the background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as per the order, comprehensively taking into account the following factors.