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

[2014 Highest 7153] The Defendant, C, and D gathered money and valuables from a vehicle that was parked and did not correct the loss of the parked vehicle and used it for the purpose of using it for the fee at the time.

At around 12:30 on September 29, 2014, the Defendant, C, and D confirmed that the hand of the Fclur (300C) vehicle parked by the victim E in the 106-ground parking lot of the 106 East East East East East East-gu, Yandong-si, the hand of the vehicle parked by the victim E, and that the above vehicle is not corrected, and D reported the network around the vehicle, and the Defendant and C carried approximately KRW 2,000 and tobacco 1 lock, which are owned by the victim in the above vehicle.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property together with C and D.

[2015 Highest 501]

1. On August 21, 2014, the Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act: (a) operated a GM5 car that was not covered by mandatory insurance on the front side of the home fluoring system located in 111-ro, Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-si, GM5 car.

2. The defendant is the birth of H, and I is the husband of H, and the defendant and I are the relatives of one another.

The Defendant, at the time and place specified in Paragraph 1, was driving the said SM5 car at the same time and place, and was charged with driving the K SM5 vehicle, which was in the atmosphere of the signal at the front.

However, the above SM5 car insurance driven by the defendant was in a state in which it is not possible for J to compensate for traffic accidents without entering into a contract, and thus, it was stated with H.

Accordingly, the above I, who is the husband of H and the defendant, has subscribed to the non-insurance special agreement, so I would be treated as driving the I, and the defendant and I conspired with "I would like to report the above vehicle to the insurance company and receive the insurance money as if the above traffic accident occurred."

According to the above public offering, the Defendant would be deemed to have driven I to L who is an employee of the victim of the victim of the sexual intercourse through H around 11:22 on August 22, 2014.