However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On August 29, 2013, the Defendants gathered that they stolen a mobile phone from the victim who was diving by entering a savena, and sold it to the stolen business entity. When one person steals a mobile phone, the rest of one person was able to look at the network.

1. At around 05:12 on August 30, 2013, the Defendants discovered the fact that the victim E was locked by the cell phone located in Pyeongtaek-si C, and Defendant B took advantage of the network, Defendant A took advantage of the difference in the victim's locking, and Defendant A took a galthot 2 mobile phone equivalent to KRW 1,080,000 in the market price owned by the victim.

2. The Defendants discovered the fact that the victim H was locked in G Ga located in Pyeongtaek-siF on the same day at around 05:36, and Defendant A was able to see the network, and Defendant B had a gallon ju S4 mobile phone equivalent to KRW 890,000 in the market price owned by the victim using the gap in which the victim was locked.

3. At around 05:43 of the same day, the Defendants discovered the fact that the victim I am locked in the above G G Ga, and the Defendant B am seeed the network, and the Defendant A used the gap in which the victim am locked, thereby holding a galthno-2 mobile phone equivalent to the market price of 1,080,000 won in the market price owned by the victim.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly stolen the property from the victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each statement of E and H;

1. A photograph of each CCTV closure;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report;

1. Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act are as follows: (a) the Defendants recognized all the facts charged; and (b) their mistake.