logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.05.21 2018재고단30
상습절도미수
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 17, 2006, the Defendant sentenced the Busan District Court to three years of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., and completed the execution of the said punishment on September 5, 2009.

On May 12, 2010, the Defendant: (a) got out of the bus No. 2 near the euthanasia located in the Busan Dong-gu, Busan, and attempted to steal the wall with the No.C. cash card, lot points card, etc., which was located in another victim’s bank owned by the Defendant; and (b) attempted to steal the wall; (c) but did not come out of the wind that was discovered to the victim-friendly arrest D, which was caused by the end of the bus No. 2010.

Accordingly, the defendant habitually attempted to steals another's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Court rulings;

1. Previous records: Criminal records, current status of personal confinement, and judgment;

1. Habitualness: In light of the records of the case subject to review, the records of the case subject to review are already destroyed due to the expiration of the preservation period, the records shall be restored by making every possible effort, and in cases where complete recovery of records is inevitable, the records shall be comprehensively assessed by the evidence of the original judgment, which can be known by the remaining materials collected, including the written judgment, and the value of the newly presented evidence during the retrial procedure, and the propriety of the decision subject to review shall be newly determined (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2154, Sept. 24, 2004). In this case, the records of the case subject to review have already been destroyed due to the expiration of the preservation period, while the records of the case subject to review were examined by taking into account the evidence of the original judgment

1. Article 342, 332, or 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Articles 342, 332, and 329 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

arrow