1. On January 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) stolen the victim’s possession of 5,00 won or more at the location of the construction work for the new construction of the complex building in Seocheon-si, Bucheon-si; (b) and (c) the location of the driver’s seat of the scoper installed at the scoper, which was kept in custody of the scoper.

2. On January 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) was in the G office operated by the Victim F, F, in Bupyeong-si, Seoul, around 14:3, around 2017, at the time of larceny; (b) the Defendant: (c) opened down the 쇠s installed on the hallway glass door of the said office by using the dracker, as described in paragraph (1), in a successive order; (d) opened the locks of the said office and the entrance door; and (e) intruded into the inside, the Defendant took out KRW 2.10,00 in cash, owned by

They have come to her.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd on a structure managed by the victim, and stolen the victim's property.

3. On January 30, 2017, the Defendant invadedd a structure, at G office operated by the victim F, as described in paragraph (2) around 02:06, the Defendant opened the entrance door where the devices of correction were damaged due to the Defendant’s criminal act, as described in paragraph (2), and intruded into the structure managed by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs by taking on-site photographs and CCTV images;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of intrusion upon a structure), and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. The sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the following circumstances and the defendant's age, occupation, sex, family relation, living environment, circumstances leading to the crime, and circumstances after the crime, under Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act, shall be determined in full view of the sentencing conditions stated in the records.

- The Defendant had no money to make soup soup, resulting in a contingent crime of this case, since there was no money to do so.

Recognizing and opposing the truth.