When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

1. On September 2, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 08:00 on September 2, 2016, the victim E was ordered to do so before the victim E, in front of thecare consortium office located in Busan Dong-gu C.

The sum of 2,190,000 Won 1,670,000 Won 1,00 air conditioners, and the sum of 3,420,000 Won 3,420,000 won, such as air conditioners, were loaded on the monthly vehicle and stolen the above vehicle from the office to prepare the invoice.

2. On September 2, 2016, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) was revoked, but from around 07:00 on September 2, 2016 to around 20:00 on the same day, the Defendant was driving a car with approximately 130 km from the Busan-gun apartment, Busan-gun, and from the underground parking lot No. 208 Dong-dong 502 on September 2, 2016, to the 2-4 east-dong, Changwon-si, Busan-si, through the Busan Dong-si C, again driving a car with approximately 130 km from the Busan-gun, Busan-gun apartment, and the 502-dong underground parking lot.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the police officers of the accused;

1. Each police statement made to E and H:

1. Notification of internal investigation reports (attached details of transmission of Kakao Stockholm text messages), internal investigation reports (verification of Unlicensed Driving Distance), and detection of unauthorized drivers;

1. Application of the motor vehicle registration ledger, the motor vehicle driver's license ledger, and statutes;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (a point of Section 329, choice of a fine), Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (a point of driving without a license and choice of a fine);

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The sentencing guidelines are not applicable because of the choice of fines to be applied to the sentencing guidelines.2. The defendant who was sentenced to the sentencing is continuously denying the crime of larceny, but this case is larceny.