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

On August 5, 2016, around 23:40 on 23:40 on 2016, the Defendant: (a) intruded into a tent of the selling store and then stolen her sublime at the market price equivalent to KRW 60,000,000, which was owned by the victim D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to reports on occurrence of theft, on-site photographs and CCTV photographs;

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] Special Mitigation Zone (4 to 1.6 months) for general property, where the defendant intrudes into places other than indoor residential space (4th to 1.6 months), and in this case, the defendant's decision not to punish [4th sentence] is not good for committing a crime by intrusion upon the victim's excessive sales store at night, but it is not good for the defendant to commit a theft of an excessive act. However, the defendant reflects the defendant's mistake; the defendant has no criminal record or criminal record exceeding the fine; the defendant has no criminal record or criminal record; the defendant does not want to punish the defendant; the defendant is the most supported by his wife and her two children; the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be considered in consideration of favorable circumstances, and the sentence shall be determined as per the order.