However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On February 7, 2015, the Defendant: (a) entered the building site of Ilyang-dong, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Ilyang-si; (b) entered the building site through a gap between the 6 entrance and the ground floor; and (c) intruded the window screen of the office of electrical supervision of the second floor by opening the building site in his hand; and (d) invaded the window screen of the office of electrical supervision of the second floor; and (e) stolen the Defendant, holding the victim D, who owned the victim D, equivalent to KRW 1.4 million at the market price, and KRW 500,000,000,000 won at the market price of the LG Nowon-gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Second-time protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A written statement of D;

1. Automobile register;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (for crime prevention, CCTV for the control of parking and stopping);

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (in relation to confiscation, the mere fact that the defendant was worn at the time of committing a crime cannot be readily deemed to have immediately provided a criminal act): The scope of sentencing is to be postponed only once, considering the following factors: Type IV (In the mitigated area) (Article 4) and the mitigated area (Article 8-1 year and June) [Special Mitigation] (Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62(1) (Article 62(1) (Article 62(1) (Article 62(1) of the Punishment Act (Article 62(1) (Article 62(1)): He/she is not subject to punishment (Article 62(1) of the Punishment Act (Article 62(1)) (Article 62(1) (Article 62(1)) (Article 62(1)): He/she is not subject

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.