A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On December 5, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to five years of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) at the Daejeon High Court on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and completed the execution of the sentence at the South Prison on February 19, 2017.

At around 11:00 on December 20, 2017, the Defendant opened and intruded a door that was not corrected in the warehouse owned by the victim D, which was located in the Sinju City, and 1,425,000 won in total in the market price owned by the victim, and used approximately 50 km, 25 km, 25 km, Mean, 45 km, 15 km, 15 km, and 15 km of the shoulder owned by the Defendant, as shown in the list of crimes attached to the attached Table from February 25, 2018 to February 25, 2018.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen property by impairing a structure or residence on eight occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of victims;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Each photograph and each investigation report;

1. Previous convictions: References to inquiries about criminal history data, court rulings, and application of statutes on the current status of personal expropriation;

1. Relevant laws of facts constituting the crime, Article 329 of the Criminal Act (a thief each point), Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of intrusion into each dwelling or building), and choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. Grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Sentencing (Scope of Recommendations) (Scope of punishment) for general property: (Special Mitigation) (Special Mitigation) for living style; Act No. 1094, Mar. 1, 2008> (Special Mitigation) for mitigation area;

2. The fact that the sentencing error reflects the Defendant’s depth, and that the victims except the victim F did not apply the Defendant’s punishment or agreed to receive the payment of damages is favorable to the Defendant.

However, it is unfavorable that the punishment of the same kind of crime has been repeated only for ten months after the execution of the punishment was completed, and the number of crimes has been many.