1. Larceny;

A. On July 1, 2013, the Defendant: (a) 09:30, and then stolen the amount of cash worth of KRW 300,00,00, such as daily divers, from the credit cooperative located in the Sungnam-si branch, Sungnam-si, by taking advantage of the gaps in which the victim E was divingd from the victim E to the kivers, using the kivers in which the kivers and kivers were kivers.

B. On November 2013, the Defendant discovered one of the “Wel” Bacafers in the market price, where the victim in a name in the parking lot was placed rapidly at the parking lot in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sung-gu, Sung-gu, Seoul, Seoul, 2013, and subsequently stolen it.

C. On December 27, 2013, at around 19:22, the Defendant: (a) confirmed that the Victim G was located in Schlage at the same place as paragraph (a); (b) opened a cooling house and a c,000 won in Seoul U.S. and cut off a c,00 won.

2. On December 27, 2013, at around 20:40 on December 27, 2013, the Defendant discovered that the Victim G was in a mixed boomer at the same place as paragraph 1(a) of Article 1, and caused the victim by putting the shoulderer’s disease, which is a lethal weapon, into his hand, and making the victim pretended with his hand, and thereby making the victim “dating the money,” and preventing the victim from resisting the victim G by threatening the victim as a shoulderer’s disease, and forcibly taking the victim’s 400,000 won, including a 1 million won check, cash 30,000 won, at a credit cooperative located on the catal.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in the first trial record;

1. The police statement of G and E;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to a CCTV image closure photograph;

1. Relevant legal theft against a crime (paragraph (1)): Special robbery (Article 329 of the Criminal Act) under Article 329 of the same Act (Article 334 (2) and (1), and Article 333 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Discretionary mitigation is advantageous to the reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act.