[1] Purport of the provision of Article 67 of the Juvenile Act and whether imprisonment with prison labor, which is a requirement for the application of Article 5-4(5) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, is also included in imprisonment with prison labor (affirmative)

[2] The case affirming the judgment of the court below that where a juvenile of larceny was sentenced one time as a juvenile of larceny and two times as an adult criminal, and the execution of the punishment was completed, and again commits larceny during the period of repeated crime, it constitutes Article 5-4 (5) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

[1] Article 5-4(5) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Amended by Act No. 10210, Mar. 31, 2010); Article 67 of the Juvenile Act / [2] Article 5-4(5) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Amended by Act No. 10210, Mar. 31, 2010); Article 67 of the Juvenile Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Park Jong-il

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2009No3313 Decided December 30, 2009

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and the public defender are also examined.

1. Article 67 of the Juvenile Act provides that "When a person who was sentenced to a punishment due to a crime committed at the time when the punishment was committed has been completed or exempted, it shall be deemed that a sentence has not been sentenced in the future when the Acts and subordinate statutes on qualifications are applied, it shall be deemed that a sentence has not been rendered in the future." In applying the Acts and subordinate statutes on the qualification of persons, the above provision is nothing more than the purport that it shall be deemed that a sentence has not been rendered in

Therefore, as a requirement for applying Article 5-4(5) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, imprisonment with prison labor as a previous criminal record must be deemed to include imprisonment with prison labor as a juvenile.

2. On September 26, 1997, the court below sentenced the defendant to a maximum of one year and two months of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny at the Seoul Southern District Court for a short period of eight months or more, on June 26, 2003, sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Seoul Central District Court for larceny, etc. on November 23, 2006, and acknowledged on August 5, 2007 that the above court sentenced ten months of imprisonment with prison labor for night, intrusion upon residence, larceny, etc. and completed the execution of the sentence. The court below held that the defendant again committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated offense, and therefore, it constitutes Article 5-4 (5) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes. The judgment of the court below is just in light of the above legal principles, and it did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation of Article 67 of the Juvenile Act and Article 5-4 (5) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Hong-hoon (Presiding Justice)