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

around March 25, 2013:10 on March 25, 2013, the Defendant stolen the Defendant with one cell phone of “Trigal gallon I” in an amount equivalent to 990,000 won at the market price owned by the victim D, which was located in the carter in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

around 23:45 on November 15, 2012, the Defendant: (a) took drinking and eating in Asan-si E restaurant; (b) took off one of the instant victims’ 3 smartphones, where the victim F, who is a business owner, was in a locking place between the clients, and was in a locking place, at the time of Samsung Ggal ju, the market price of which is equivalent to one million won owned by the said victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning investigation reports, filing of photographs of damaged articles, and application of field photographs;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act under the suspended sentence is that the defendant experienced economic difficulties while being subject to industrial accidents and commits each of the crimes in this case, and there are circumstances to consider the motive thereof, all damaged goods are returned, the defendant is a family member to support the crimes in this case, and all of the crimes in this case are led to confessions and reflects shall be determined as ordered by the order.