When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On December 2, 2016, at around 19:59, the Defendant, in the sports store “C” operated by the victim’s name in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, was stolen by taking advantage of the gaps in which the employees’ surveillance was neglected, resulting in the theft of one of the 410,000 won at the market price, which is the victim’s possession.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning suspect interrogation of D;

1. A E-document;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to ctvfafa

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with regard to the order of provisional payment is to return damaged goods to the victim, and the defendant is recognized as having agreed with the victim, but the defendant has a record of having been punished several times of larceny, and the amount of fine determined by the summary order of this case is to be imposed in light of equity with similar cases.

subsection (b) of this section.