A 60-year-old man, who committed theft again just a month after being released from prison, was sentenced to actual imprisonment in the appellate court. It has been confirmed that this man has repeatedly engaged in the same crime for over 30 years, serving time in prison seven times.
Repeated Crimes
On the 23rd, the Jeonju District Court's 3rd Criminal Division (Presiding Judge Park Hyun-yi) stated that it upheld the original sentence of two years in prison, dismissing the defendant's appeal regarding the charges of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (theft).
The defendant, referred to as A, was prosecuted for breaking into four locations, including offices and accommodations, while roaming around various areas including Asan, Chungcheongnam-do, and Gunsan, Iksan, and Gochang in Jeollabuk-do from August 7 to 12, 2024, stealing 3.4 million won in cash as well as high-priced wallets and slippers.
Criminal Acts and Court's Judgment
During the investigative process, it was revealed that A had been sentenced to actual imprisonment seven times for the same theft crime in the past and committed another offense just a month after being released from prison in July last year. This habitual pattern of crime led to the court's severe judgment.
The first instance court noted, “The defendant committed the crime shortly after being released and during the probation period, and considering the circumstances and methods of each crime, the nature of the offense is poor,” subsequently sentencing him to two years in prison.
In response, A appealed, claiming, “The sentence is too heavy”, but the appellate court did not accept this.
The appellate court stated, “The defendant, who has repeatedly committed theft for over 30 years and has served time for nearly ten years after being sentenced seven times, committed another crime just a month after his release,” and concluded, “Even considering various sentencing conditions, the original sentence cannot be seen as excessively heavy beyond the reasonable bounds of discretion.”
This case has drawn attention as a reminder of the need for effective criminal penalties against habitual thieves and measures to prevent recidivism.
Image source: Reference materials to assist understanding of the article / gettyimagesbank
