A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

On April 30, 2014, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, for one year and six months, and two years of suspended execution, and is currently in the grace period.

Around 10:00 on April 20, 2015, the Defendant: (a) removed 11 fire-fighting pipe windows equivalent to 209,000 won at the market price of the victim apartment residents of the apartment building installed in the apartment corridor located in Goyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-si; (b) removed 11 units of the fire-fighting pipe installed in the apartment corridor in advance; and (c) stolen from that time until April 27, 2015, the Defendant habitually stolen 48 units of the pipe that amounted to 912,00 won at a total of five occasions, as shown in the list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements in C and D;

1. Report on occurrence of a theft;

1. Court rulings and criminal records;

1. Investigation report (verification of the market price of damaged goods, confirmation of damage caused by a river village 15 complex, and hearing of statements by a witness C);

1. Data from each CCTV photograph;

1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes recognizing dampness in light of the records of crimes, the number of crimes, the frequency of crimes, and the fact that the same kind of crimes are repeated several times in a planned manner;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 332 of the pertinent Act and Articles 32 and 329 of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts and the choice of punishment is that the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime that steals the same fire-fighting pipe as the damaged goods of this case over 31 times for 3 months, and repeats the crime of this case under the same law during the suspension period. In the absence of a fire-fighting pipe, which is a fire extinguishing machine, there is a need for a corresponding punishment because additional damage may occur in the event of a fire.

On the other hand, the amount of damage caused by the instant case is not so large, and the Defendant may pay the amount of damage after the closure of public trial to the apartment management office to recover the damage. The Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime due to economic difficulties, and the instant case is deemed to have led to the instant crime.