2014 Highest 969 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny)

A person shall be appointed.

The Southern Superior's Office (Court Prosecution) and Kim Tae-dae (Court Trial)

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

February 3, 2015

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Criminal facts

Periodical Offense Power

On August 28, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to four years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny) at the Chuncheon District Court on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and was released on October 26, 2012 and on February 4, 2013.

The parole period expired.

i. Doe Crime

On September 15, 2014, between 00:0 to 06:05, the Defendant: (a) opened the window of the victim’s home room and intruded into the house of the victim of Chuncheon C&C, and thereby cutting down cash of KRW 7,30,000,000 in cash, Chapter 2 (20,000), and Chapter 1 (5,000,000,000) on a lot.

In addition to this, the Defendant habitually stolen 1,142,00 won in cash and 10,000 won in 3 occasions, such as the attached list 2, 3, and 4, and 10,000 won in a fake gift certificate 2, 5,00 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Each E and F statement (victim);

1. A sufficient appraisal statement prepared by the appraiser G and H (the Gangwon Provincial Police Agency Scientific Investigative System);

1. Each appraisal report prepared by the I appraiser;

1. A report on the results of field inspections;

1. Seizure records;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal records, investigation reports (reports attached to judgments, etc.), written judgments attached thereto, and records of custody of each individual;

1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes recognizing dampness in light of the records of each crime, the frequency of crimes, the frequency of crimes, and the fact that the same kind of crime has been committed several times in a planned manner;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 5-4 (1) and Article 330 of the Criminal Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes.

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

The reason for sentencing in Article 35 and proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act

[Scope of Recommendation] Habitual Larceny Category 1 (Ordinary Habitual Larceny) basic area (two years to four years) (no special person)

* Scope of sentence comparison between applicable sentences and recommended types: 3 years to 4 years

【Determination of Sentence】

In light of all the circumstances revealed in the proceedings of the pleading of this case, such as the fact that the crime of this case was committed during the period of repeated crime even though there was a criminal force of the same kind, and there is no light that there was a misunderstanding of the error, etc., the punishment as ordered shall

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

On July 2, 2014: around 40, the Defendant discovered one bicycle at the market price equivalent to 400,000 won in front of the Kmaart, which was installed with L from the victim in the front of the Kmaart, ChuncheonJ, Gangwon-do, and laid down a locking device in order to steal it. The Defendant attempted to commit a thief by a slope M belonging to the Gangwon-do Police Station where he was under diving and patrol duty, with respect to the theft incident which occurred recently in the vicinity of the thief.

2. Determination

In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged as a result of the examination of evidence, the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor is insufficient to recognize the above facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① According to the appraisal document prepared by the appraiser N of the National Institute of Scientific and Investigative Research, it is difficult to determine the identity of the criminal committed in CCTV at the time of the crime. ② As a result of search of the defendant’s residence, it was difficult to find the personal appearance worn by the defendant at the time of the crime. ③ It is doubtful whether M is clearly aware of the offender’s appearance, etc. at the time of the crime. ④ In the course of attempted theft, it was difficult to find out any trace related to the defendant, such as the Defendant’s fingerprint, from the victim’s fingerprint, etc.

3. Conclusion

If so, this part of the facts charged should be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act because it falls under a case where there is no proof of a crime, or inasmuch as it is found guilty of a crime violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny),

Judges Choi Han-han

A person shall be appointed.