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

Defendant,

1. On January 26, 2013, around 23:32, Asan City: (a) opened and opened a window that has not been corrected by the C community hall located in the Asia-si B; and (b) removed 10,000 won in cash from the wall of the victim D, the victim E, and the victim F; and

2. The same year;

2. 12. At around 01:33 around 01:13: (a) opened a window that is not corrected at the same place as Paragraph 1; and (b) cut off, with the victim G-owned one house market value equivalent to 25,000 won in the warehouse;

3. On the 13th day of the same month, around 00:00, when putting a stone on windows at the same place as paragraph (1) and putting them into the victim G owned by the injured party G, then cutting down or cutting down them with two, seven, seven, one disease per week, one beer, three disease, beer, three disease, and the market value of kimchi equivalent to 15,000 won in total; and

4. On the 16th day of the same month, at around 23:00, a toilet window was destroyed and damaged by breaking the window at the same place as paragraph (1), and as a result, a theft was made out of the amount equivalent to 1,000 won at the market price of 1,00 won per the victim G-owned door.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. Each statement of D, G and H;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (field investigation,/ctV verification investigation, etc./sct verification request for appraisal);

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime (a point of night-time theft in a board) and Article 331 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime (a point of each special larceny in a board);

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

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds that the suspended execution is not less than Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 62(1) (the time when criminal conduct is substituted, there is no particular criminal power and