A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Punishment of the crime

On May 1, 1996, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for at least two years in the Daejeon District Court for intrusion on buildings at night, larceny, etc., and on December 9, 1998, at the Daejeon District Court, one year and six months in imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) at the Daejeon District Court on September 21, 200, two years in imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) at the Gwangju District Court on September 21, 200, and on October 16, 2015, and completed the execution of the sentence in the Heung prison on February 1, 2017.

On June 30, 2017, at around 08:00, the Defendant opened a entrance opened in the “D church” located in Gwangju Northern-gu, Gwangju, and opened a gold box in the first floor, and arbitrarily carried 80,000 won in cash owned by the victim.

In addition, from March 31, 2017 to the above date, the Defendant habitually stolen KRW 2,207,000 in cash owned by the victims over 22 times in total, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Form.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Each statement of E, F, G, H, I, and J;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: A written reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (verification of suspect theft history), and current status of personal confinement;

1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes recognizing dampness in light of the records of each crime, the number of crimes, the frequency of crimes, and the repeated crimes of the same kind in the judgment;

1. Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. The reason for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes is that the Defendant committed the instant crime of this case under the same law repeatedly during the period of repeated crimes even though he/she had a previous criminal conviction of the same kind.

The fact that the defendant reflects his mistake and seems to fall under the crime of life penalty is a favorable circumstance.

In addition, the defendant's age, sex, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of crime, circumstances after crime, etc. are shown in the arguments.