A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Punishment of the crime

On June 16, 2015, between 03:00 and 05:00 on June 16, 2015, the Defendant intruded the victim D’s house located in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 2nd floor through a beradra window that was not corrected and stolen 460,000 won in cash at the home, the victim was locked.

In addition, the Defendant stolen property worth KRW 2,216,00,00 in total over six occasions, as described in the list of crimes in the attached Table, from that time to July 9, 2015, respectively.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the victims' residence at night and stolen the property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Each police statement with respect to D, E, F, G, H, and I;

1. Scenes of each on-site photograph, each CCTV image taken;

1. Application of police seizure records and photographs and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

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

1. Scope of the recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria table;

(a) Each recommendation and sentence of concurrent crimes and concurrent crimes [the scope of recommending punishment] general property: the mitigated area (8 to 16 months) (8 to 196 months) (special mitigation) of types 4;

(b) Criteria for handling multiple crimes: 8 months to 2 months of imprisonment (the lower limit of the basic crime for the lower limit, the upper limit shall be 8 months, and the upper limit shall be 1/2 and 1/3 of the upper limit of the basic crime, respectively); and

2. Strict punishment is inevitable in that the defendant who was sentenced to a sentence has the same criminal history, and if so, the defendant committed the crime in this case, and the recovery of damage is not achieved.

However, there is an agreement with some victims on the crime of this case due to the absence of clear living means, the defendant's poor environment, and the absence of clear living means, and the defendant will not be able to reconvene with his mother in 33 years.