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 October 14, 2015, at around 13:10 on October 14, 2015, the Defendant entered the residence of the victim C located in Yansan-gu, Seoul, and opened the entrance door and intruded into the dwelling space, and subsequently, the Defendant stolen the Defendant with one sprink, which includes a sum of 21,670 won in the said place.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C Statement Statement;

1. On-site photographs;

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

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning investigation reports (related to addition of damaged articles);

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment (absent point, a choice of imprisonment), and Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (absent point of intrusion upon residence and choice of imprisonment);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Consideration of favorable circumstances among the following grounds for sentencing);

1. Protective observation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc.;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act;

1. Basic area (a year to June 1) of the sentencing criteria shall be applied [the scope of recommended punishment] of the larceny for general property;

2. Circumstances favorable to the determination of sentence include the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflected his mistake, the value of the damaged articles is small amount, and most damaged articles are returned to the victim.

The crime of this case was stolen by intrusion upon another person's residence, and the nature of the crime is not good in light of the law of the crime, and the defendant committed repeatedly the crime of this case even though he had been punished several times as a crime of the same kind.

In addition to the above circumstances and other circumstances, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the various sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, shall be determined as per Disposition.