The number of larceny crimes in case of theft of each property in a three-school room for the main house;

A thief who intrudes upon A’s house, steals the property owned by him/her from the house to the house, and, around that time, invaded upon B’s room and attempted to steals the property, the two crimes vary between the place of the crime and the manager of the goods, and constitute a separate crime.

Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 329 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Attorney Seo Dong-chul et al.

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 89No481 delivered on March 24, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

55 days under detention after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

The defendant and his defense counsel's grounds of appeal are also examined.

As determined by the court below, if the defendant intruded into the house of 00 Won Won, stolen the property owned by him, and then attempted to steals or attempted to steals the property by intrusion on the house of 100 Won Won, then the above two crimes shall constitute a separate crime because the place of the crime and the manager of the goods are different. Thus, the court below's measure that the above two crimes are concurrent crimes is just and there is no violation of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the number of larceny crimes as pointed out.

In this case, a judgment sentenced to imprisonment with labor for less than ten years cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal on the ground that sentencing is unreasonable.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and part of the detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all Justices who reviewed the appeal.

Justices Ansan-man (Presiding Justice)