However, the execution of the sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On August 18, 2017, the Defendant: (a) committed a theft by means of inserting property equivalent to KRW 202,900 in total market price, including 11,00,000 in the market price, which is equivalent to KRW 28,90,00 in the victim management market price where the victim was displayed in the store by taking advantage of the gaps in which the victim’s surveillance was neglected; (b) two “lurf Emp Emp frames 57,” which is equivalent to KRW 12,60,00 in the market price; and (c) one “brut width” which is equivalent to KRW 10,90 in the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement (C);

1. Reporting on the arrest of the case;

1. Photographs of the recovered article;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on a receipt of details of goods stolen without purchase by the victim;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting a crime. Article 329 (Selection of Punishment of Imprisonment);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act ( Taking into account the favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing) of the suspended sentence [the scope of the recommended sentence] The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da14488, Apr. 2, 2007) (hereinafter “Special mitigated person”) is that the defendant committed a crime; the reason for committing the crime; the financial status and health conditions of the defendant; the method and value of the defendant’s property; and the value of the stolen goods; the damaged goods are deemed to have been returned;