If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On September 3, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of four months for larceny at the Incheon District Court on September 3, 2012, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 11, 2012 and is still under suspended execution.

On November 27, 2012, around 08:40 on November 27, 2012, the Defendant: (a) worked for the victim D’s “Eel” operated by the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, as an employee of the said Mour; (b) went out one string in terms of the market price under the victim’s ownership in the Mourteran region.

The Defendant continued to open a door of the said passenger vehicle in the telecom parking lot using the FDap car key owned by the victim, and continued to take 1,580,000 won in cash owned by the victim, which is the first receipt of the car operation.

Accordingly, the Defendant stolen the above galms and cash owned by the victim as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Suspectss, residential areas and CCTV photographs;

1. Before holding: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiry reports on criminal records, etc. (A), investigation reports (former and summary orders, written judgments, and attachment of case inquiry);

1. Article 329 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the same Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. In light of the fact that the defendant for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order was finally and conclusively sentenced to larceny and again commits the crime of this case while being under suspension of execution, and that it is difficult to eliminate the risk of recidivism, etc., the defendant should be punished strictly. However, the defendant should be punished strictly, considering the circumstances such as the fact that he/she is recognized of his/her mistake and reflects it, that the victim expressed his/her intention not to be punished, that the victim expressed his/her intention that he/she does not want it, and that the damage is not severe, the punishment is determined as ordered.