A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for eight months and by imprisonment for six months.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

(a) Defendant A: Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 152 Subparag. 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (no license or imprisonment with prison labor);

B. Defendant B: Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act

1. A aggravated defendant for a repeated crime: Article 35 of the Criminal Act;

1. A aggravated defendant for concurrent crimes: The former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Small-scale mitigated Defendants: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act

1. Defendant B: Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court] Defendant A: The mitigation area (specific elements: evaluation of mitigation factors on an equal basis with a person who is not subject to punishment; evaluation of aggravated factors: identical repeated crimes of the same kind; January or June) of the mitigation area (specific theft, such as neglected things) for the general property: The mitigation area (unlimited to punishment; January or June) for the general property of the thief : The scope of final sentencing in accordance with the sentencing guidelines for multiple thiefs (the minimum sentencing period in law) [decision of sentencing] for six months or longer, and Defendant A has the history of having been punished for the same crime even before, and Defendant B has the history of having been punished for the same crime only once, and Defendant B has the history of having been punished for the same crime.

Defendant

In the case of A, after being sentenced to imprisonment for three years for a crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of the Specific Crimes, the crime of this case committed again during the period of repeated crime, even though he was sentenced to a punishment of three years for the construction materials that were regularly loaded in the construction site in common in 2013.

However, the extent of the damage is weak due to the significant degree of possession, and the damage of the victim has been recovered considerably, and the damage has not been punished against the defendants, considering the favorable circumstances.

The motive and background of crimes, including the above circumstances, are as follows.