However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On January 25, 2017, around 06:18, the Defendant: (a) held a 12-day apartment complex under the ground of apartment parking lot “A” located in the Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-ro 315, the Defendant stolen the Defendant’s property worth KRW 1400,000,000 in total market value, including the Plaintiff’s new merchandise coupon 100,000 won and KRW 100,000,000,000,000 won, which is the victim’s possession in front of the early custody of the 200,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. B written statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the screen by cutting CCTV course;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the defendant had the same criminal records as the defendant was punished immediately before the instant crime is unfavorable.

On the other hand, it is favorable that the defendant has compensated and agreed on the damage to the victim, that the defendant has been sentenced to a fine and only one time, and that the defendant is against the defendant.

Other conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the age, sex, etc. of the accused, shall be determined as per the order.