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

1. On February 27, 2014, at least 03:30 on February 27, 2014, the Defendant: (a) intruded the victim B with the security personnel belonging to the F police agency in charge of the prevention of accidents by undergraduate students of E University, who participated in the original test; and (b) invaded the victim B’s patrol service into the method through the entrance opened at 301, while serving as the security personnel belonging to the F police agency in charge of the prevention of accidents by undergraduate students of E University; and (c) stolen the victim B’s cash, which is 698,000 won owned by the victim from the wall of the victim B, who was on the television table.

2. The Defendant, at around 03:40 on the same day as paragraph (1) of this Article, intruded into a scheme by means of a opened entrance, which led to 311 on the same day, and stolen money owned by the victim’s G from the wall of the victim’s G, which was located on a television table, with the amount of KRW 98,00 in cash owned by the victim.

3. The Defendant, at around 03:50 on the same day as paragraph (1) of this Article, intruded into the method by means of open entrances, which came to reach 305, and stolen the victim H’s cash owned by the victim H, USD 60,000, USD 2, and USD 10,000, and KRW 120,000, market price of which contain two copies of the cultural products right of KRW 120,00.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to B, G, and H;

1. Seizure records;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs about recovery of damaged articles;

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Although the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the probation and community service order have a record of being punished several times for the same kind of crime, the crime committed in depth and was committed under such circumstances as to make it difficult for the victims to grow into a mixed child, and all the damaged goods have been returned immediately to the victims.