On January 29, 2016, at around 15:30, the Defendants, together, attempted to steal the victim’s ship of the village bus platform C, using a knife knife knife that was being cultivated from the knife, in a way that can be easily cut off to the knife knife on the knife.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the victim's dry field photographs;

1. The Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 342, 331(2) and 331(1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants who attempted to be mitigated: Articles 25(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act

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

1. The meaning of the suspended sentence (the period of suspended sentence: the period of suspended sentence: each of the defendants shall be suspended for a certain period of time; and the period shall be deemed to have lapsed after the suspension of sentence (two years from the date of the suspended sentence) (Articles 59 and 60 of the Criminal Act). The suspended sentence shall be deemed to have been acquitted after the lapse of such period (Articles 59 and 60 of the Criminal Act). The suspended sentence shall be deemed to have been imposed when a person who received the suspended sentence becomes subject to a judgment of suspension of qualification or more severe punishment during the grace period, or when a prior conviction resulting in suspension of qualification or more severe punishment is discovered (Article 61 of the Criminal Act). The defendants: Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 59 of the Criminal Act provides that the crime of this case was attempted, and there is no economic damage suffered by the victim; the defendants recognized the crime of this case and divided the defendants; Defendant A did not have any record of criminal punishment for a violation of the Public Sanitation Act prior to about twenty-eight years.