except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

From May 7, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 23:00 on June 5, 2014, while working for the victim’s E mobile phone trading business in Daejeon Jung-gu, Seoul-B-38, the Defendant: (b) opened a door in the above E and intruded into the victim’s mobile phone trading business; and (c) cut off with one unit of G3 smartphone, the total market value of which is at least 2 million won; and (d) one unit of gallon, the gallon-si 5 smartphone.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

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

1. The reasons for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the reasons for the suspended sentence and the conditions of sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act) are as follows: (a) the scope of recommended sentences [the scope of sentence [the category of larceny crimes, theft against general property, theft and theft in general property, mitigation area (unlimited to punishment], 8 months to one year and six months] and the following circumstances; (b) the sentence shall be imposed as per the disposition (However, a sentence which is lower than the lowest limit of the recommended sentence taking into account the following circumstances): Recognizing favorable circumstances: The facts of crime are recognized and reflected; (c) the victim and the victim agreed smoothly: (d) there was a record of punishment several times for the same crime; and (e) the Daejeon District Court has been sentenced to a fine of five million won or more for larceny on August 23, 2007; and (e) other crimes committed during the period of parole, including the motive for and circumstances leading up to the crime and the previous order of a criminal defendant.