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

The defendant was a person who worked at the D cafeteria operated by the victim C in the Changwon-si, who was an employee, and was willing to steal cash by intrusioning on the restaurant with the mother and child's identification of the password of the correction device of the cafeteria.

1. On August 2015, the Defendant: (a) opened a password in front of the above restaurant and intruded into the restaurant; and (b) cut off 70,000 won owned by the victim from the Kashter’s treasury.

2. The Defendant intruded at the same place in the same manner in the middle of the same month, and subsequently stolen KRW 50,000, which was owned by the victim, from the Kitter’s treasury.

3. On September 8, 2015, the Defendant invadedd at the same place in the same manner at the same time, and subsequently, upon taking 50,000 won owned by the Defendant out of the Kitter credit cooperative, the Defendant stolen it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Attachment of CDAs and Photographss);

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

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [the scope of recommended punishment] 4 types of theft in general property [the special mitigated person] / [the (4) types] in the area of special mitigation (4 to 1 year and 6 months] / In the case of intrusion in a place other than the indoor residential space, the defendant is not subject to punishment [the decision of sentence] / The fact that there is no other criminal history except for the punishment of a fine for a violation of traffic law (not after an accident), the fact that there was no other criminal history except for the punishment of a fine for a violation of road traffic law (not after an accident), the fact that the victim agreed smoothly with the victim, taking into account the circumstances of the crime, methods of the crime, the scale of damage, the age and environment of the defendant, etc.