logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2012. 7. 20. 선고 2012고단1996 판결
[특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)][미간행]
Escopics

Defendant

Prosecutor

Kim J-jin (Public prosecution) and Song-young (public trial)

Defense Counsel

Attorney Park Jong-young (National Election)

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Criminal facts

On October 29, 2009, the Defendant sentenced the Daegu District Court to one year and six months for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and completed the execution of the sentence on March 18, 201.

The Defendant used the gap in the management of employees in the stores, stores, etc. where there are many people to steal the things in the stores.

1. On April 201, 201, the Defendant: (a) placed the victim Nonindicted Party 3 on the first floor of the Dong-dong shopping underground store located in Daegu-gu ( Address 2 omitted); (b) placed the victim Nonindicted Party 3 in a household room and stolen the victim by inserting the victim Nonindicted Party 3’s oral 1 left door.

2. On January 1, 2012, around 15:00 on the first day of the first day, the Defendant: (a) placed in the Daegu-gu △△△△△△ store located in Daegu-gu ( Address 1 omitted); (b) placed the victim Nonindicted 4’s oral one turn on an emergency warning, which has the victim Nonindicted 4’s awareness of suffering from the market price in managing △△△△△△△△△△△△△

3. On January 31, 2012, around 15:00, the Defendant: (a) committed a theft by suffering female clothes worth KRW 698,00,00 at the Daegu department store with the third floor of “○○○○○” store with the third floor of Daegu middle-gu ( Address 1 omitted).

Accordingly, the Defendant habitually stolen property worth 698,000 won in total over three times in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement of Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 4, and Nonindicted 3

1. Previous convictions: Criminal records, investigation reports (previous records, court rulings, and date of completion of execution);

1. Habituality of judgment: Recognition of dampness in light of the records of each crime, the frequency of crimes, the frequency of crimes, and the repeated crimes of the same kind in the judgment;

Application of Statutes

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

In general, Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 329 of the Criminal Act.

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Articles 35 and proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., confession of all offenses and reflective points)

Grounds for sentencing

According to the sentencing guidelines, the crime of this case constitutes category 1 (general) among habitual and repeated larceny of the thief group, and the scope of the recommended sentence is two years to four years (basic area).

Although the defendant makes a confession of all crimes and reflects them, it is possible to have the same power, and even during the period of repeated crime, it is inevitable to sentence a sentence with heavy punishment.

Judges Kim Young-American

arrow