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

On October 9, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 05:07, at the “E” store for the victim’s D operation in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, destroyed and damaged the entrance, and invaded into the store, thereby having a total of KRW 13,300 won and milk.

As such, the Defendant stolen another’s property by destroying and damaging the entrance of a part of the building at night.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing photograph, CD, and day-to-day verification;

1. Article 331 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

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

1. The defense counsel on the assertion of counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act asserts to the effect that the defendant was in a state of mental disability under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime.

However, in light of the circumstances such as the background and method of the crime indicated in the record, the contents of the crime, and the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, it is recognized that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime, but it does not seem that the defendant did not have the weak ability to discern things or make decisions. Therefore, the above assertion is rejected

In addition to the well-grounded protective disposition for sentencing, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into consideration the following: (a) there is no previous conviction in addition to the protective disposition for sentencing; (b) the Defendant has been 19 years of age, and is currently suffering from the congenital000s and gymorglass, (c) the Defendant committed the instant crime in contingency under the influence