However, each of the above penalties shall be executed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On August 4, 2011, at around 02:30, the Defendants opened a restaurant door that is not set up and opened at the seat of the Victim F’s Mar. 4, 201, carried out with the kis of the victim’s H rocketing car owned by the Defendant at the seat of the Treasury, and Defendant B and Defendant D reported the network. Defendant A opened the door of the said car parked at the neighboring parking lot and boarded it into the driver’s seat, and Defendant C was on board the front line.

As a result, the Defendants committed a theft of the car amounting to KRW 25.9 million in the market price owned by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (the result of digital siren analysis);

1. Defendants of the relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 331(2) and 331(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Small-scale mitigated Defendants: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants in the suspension of execution: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (in the case of this case, the defendants were juveniles at the time of committing the crime for about five years, and considering the fact that the victim F was the juvenile and the victim F wanting to be the wife);

1. Defendants of a community service order: Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;