주간에 주거침입을 한 상습절도범에 대한 상습절도죄 및 주거침입죄의 죄수 문제 - 대법원 2015. 10. 15. 선고 2015도8169 판결을 중심으로 -

The Supreme Court case(Decision 2015do8169 decided October 15, 2015) goes on the research on Numbers of Crimes of a Habitual Thief Committing Trespass. The Supreme Court can not see that this habitual theft if the thief during the day as a means of breaking and entering offenses in the assessment of the illegality of their actions contained in the daytime burglary Penal Code §332(habitual crimes) and §329(Larceny) sets of configuration assessment requirements. So daytime burglary was ruled that acts as a habitual theft burglary configured separately. Also, if habitual thieves who steal the riches that were in the daytime residential break, separate burglary is established. This position is the position of the existing arrangement which ruled that the decision entered into only habitual theft. A problem that occurs imbalance in sentencing between daytime and nighttime humidity habitual theft burglary, established issue of separate burglary and the problem of habitual crimes. The cause lies in the distinction between day and night. In order to solve this problem, I offer that the new legislation of no distinction between daytime and nighttime theft as German and Japanese Penal Code.