beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment for two years, Defendant B's imprisonment for one year, Defendant C's imprisonment for six months, and Defendant D for a fine of two million won.
Reasons
. Defendant C: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act
1. Defendant D of the provisional payment order: Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court (Defendant A, B, and C)
1. Defendant A: Type IV (In the case of the thief thief) for general property, the area of special aggravation (in the case of the same kind of repeated crime not falling under night-time damage, intrusion upon residence, and special circumstances, and habitual crimes, one year to six years, in the case of the habitual crimes);
2. Defendant B: A thie of the theft of general property in category 4 (In the case of night-time destruction, intrusion upon residence, habitual crimes, one year to six years) and special aggravation area (in the case of habitual crimes, one year and six months), * An offense for which the sentencing guidelines have not been set, for at least one year and six months.
3. Defendant C’s crime Nos. 1 and 2 (each special larceny): 4 types of larceny in general property (the night-time theft and flooding, one year to six months): A. 4 types of larceny in general property (the period from one year and six months) (the period from one year and six months): mitigated area (the period from one year and one year and six months) (the period from one year and six months): 1 year to six months (the period from one year and six months) (the period from one year and six months from one year and six months) (the period from one year and six months from one year and six months), and thus, Defendant A and B repeatedly committed larceny in combination with the same method.
Defendant
A has committed a crime of the same law again during the suspension of execution or repeated crime due to the same crime.
Defendant
B also committed a crime under the same law during the period of suspension of execution due to the same crime.
Defendant
During the crimes A and B, there is also a case where the amount of damage has been serious to exceed 30 million won.
Most of the victims have not been recovered.
Defendant
In light of the personal relationship between A, B, and C and the specific method of committing the instant crime, the leading of the instant crime appears to be Defendant A, and the degree of participation by Defendant B and C seems to be relatively minor.
In particular, the defendant C has a different obstacle to the first degree of intellectual disability.