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

On March 9, 2018, at around 05:10 on March 9, 2018, the Defendant was at the “D convenience store” of the victim C’s operation located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the Defendant reported the network in order to steal the damaged goods of E’s starting line of the employee E in the Kabrter, and the Defendant was at the victim’s seat in the Kabrter display stand, such as the sand site, and the Mobl site, the 50,000 won of the goods owned by the victim.

As a result, the defendant stolen the victim's property jointly with the person who was not the victim of his name.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. C’s statement;

1. In the investigation report (the victim party investigation, etc.), CCTV photographs within the payment receipt, convenience store, and CCTV video CDs (the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant did not know the theft of the victim's name-free box and denied the defendant's criminal act. However, according to the evidence above, the defendant was around the victim when he steals the damaged goods, and in the case of certain damaged goods, the defendant was placed in the front part of the victim's name-free box or the part of the damaged goods, and the defendant was placed in the front part of the victim's name-free box or the part of the damaged goods. Considering the time when the defendant's name-free winner was at the convenience store with the convenience store over three occasions, the defendant could be recognized to have committed a crime as stated in the judgment, and the argument denying this is difficult to accept.) The application of the statute is applicable.

1. Article 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration shall be made again for the reason of sentencing);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for six to five years;

2. Determination of types of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;