A Imprisonment for six months, Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 3,00,000 won.

Defendant

B The above fine shall not be paid.

Defendant

A was sentenced to imprisonment for habitual larceny at the Seoul Central District Court on July 5, 2014, and on December 31, 2016, the Seoul Central District Court completed the execution of the sentence.

1. On August 15, 2017, at around 04:02, Defendant A, at the entrance of the building in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, stolen the victim E with 61 opphones equivalent to KRW 1,000,000, the market price of the victim’s possession by taking advantage of the crebs in which E was under influence of alcohol at the entrance of the building in the said place.

2. On August 15, 2017, Defendant B acquired stolen goods by purchasing at least 30,000 won of the phone 61 cost, knowing that it was stolen from A at least 30,00,00 won of the market price of the victim E, one subway No. 7, a subway No. 1, a subway No. 3, a Dong-dong, a subway No. 1, a subway No. 7, a Dong-dong, and the victim E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Each protocol of seizure and each list of seizure;

1. Investigation reports (request, etc. for provision of communication confirmation data);

1. Requests for provision of communication confirmation data and replies for provision of communication data;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of written inquiries about criminal history and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

(a) Defendant A: Article 329 of the Criminal Act (the choice of imprisonment);

B. Defendant B: Article 362(1) of the Criminal Act (Optional to a punishment)

1. A aggravated defendant for a repeated crime: Article 35 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B who is detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B: The reasoning for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act lies in the history that the Defendants were punished for the same kind of crime, and Defendant A commits the instant crime at the same time during the period of repeated crime; and it is so decided as per Disposition by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc.