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

On September 7, 2018, at around 03:58, the Defendant 150,00 won (50,000 won) in cash, which was owned by the victim and was placed on his/her book, was stolen by breaking the house with three multi-households located in Seocheon-si B, but going beyond the house with the house, and invaded before 1st of the first floor where the victim C (russia person) resides, and putting his/her hand over with the open window, and putting him/her up his/her hand over.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C’s statement;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. On-site reports on results of field identification, reports on internal investigation by the police, and reports on investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. In light of the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Act, such as the method and form of the instant crime and the degree of damage inflicted thereon, etc., the case is disadvantageous, such as the following: (a) the defendant recognized all the facts charged and made a mistake in depth and did not repeat again; (b) the defendant did not have any record of punishment for the same type of crime; (c) the victim has been returned to the victim in full; and (d) the conditions of punishment indicated in the arguments, such as the defendant’s character and behavior, the environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered by the disposition.