Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On April 18, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and six months for larceny in Seoul Southern District Court on April 18, 201, and the sentence became final and conclusive on April 26, 2014, and is currently under suspended sentence.

On April 2, 2016, around 18:50 on April 2, 2016, the Defendant: (a) committed a theft by taking advantage of the gaps around the Seoul Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Party B’s work as an employee; (b) by taking advantage of the gaps around the market price of KRW 299,00,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. C’s statement;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. Application of CCTV closure photographs and statutes on damaged photographs;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Selection of an alternative fine (to take into account the following circumstances):

1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which are to be sentenced to a fine [the scope of recommended punishment in accordance with the sentencing guidelines], and thus, the sentencing guidelines are not applied. [Determination of sentence] The defendant has the same criminal history of being sentenced to punishment for larceny six times in the same kind of larceny, and the defendant has been punished for habitual larceny. In particular, even though he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the same kind of crime, he is not aware of it within the suspended sentence and the probation observation period, and even if he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the same crime, he is not easy to commit the crime in this case.

However, the fact that the crime of this case appears to have arisen from a very contingent desire, the degree of damage is not significant, and the defendant voluntarily submitted the damaged items to return them, and the defendant did not repeat the mistake again while admitting and reflecting the depth of the crime.

The sentence of a fine like the order shall be imposed only once in consideration of the circumstances, such as the fact that the store has been suffering from damage, the fact that the center has made a serious effort to recover damage, and the fact that there are children to support, etc.