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

The defendant and B are women relations.

At around 18:10 on July 26, 2015, the Defendant and B entered the inner clothes specialty store operated by the victim D, the victim D, who was located in Macheon-si, and the Defendant collected them in the display stand, and the Defendant collected them in a bank prepared in advance, and B took the clothes around the Defendant’s surrounding area, as if he saw he saw him to wear the clothes and steals the Defendant’s inner clothes.

After that, the Defendant and B came out of the above E store, and the Defendant collected three panty pantytys owned by the above victim and two pantys together with the above victim, which were displayed at the stand stand, and B was immediately attached to the Defendant, and the Defendant stolen the clothes of the Defendant while driving as if he was putting the clothes in front.

Accordingly, the Defendant, together with B, stolen clothes worth a total of KRW 3.60,000,00 of the market price of the above victim’s possession, and stolen the victims’ property worth KRW 593,900 in total, together with B, from July 26, 2015 to August 9, 2015, as indicated in the list of crimes committed in the attached Table.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of the police as to B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on seizure records;

1. Article 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the defendant was punished twice or more due to the same kind of crime, but the case is not disadvantaged. However, considering the fact that the defendant is against the defendant's wrong mind, that the defendant has agreed with the victims, that the amount of damage is not large, and that the living penalty is living, the sentence like the order shall be determined.