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

On January 28, 2019, at around 00:15, the Defendant opened a string door in front of the residence of the victim C located in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and entered a string, and the Defendant taken 1080,000 won in cash, which is the cash owned by the victim, who was stationed in a cresh where the victim drinks alcohol and locked.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the victim's residence at night and stolen the property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. C’s statement;

1. Investigation report (verification of CCTV around the site and verification of vehicles operated by victims due to disasters, etc.);

1. Application of CCTV Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] The mitigation area (8 to 1.6 months) of the mitigated area (8 to 1.6 months) of the mitigated area of general property [Special Mitigation] [decision of the sentenced sentence] The defendant again committed the instant crime even though he was punished for the same kind of crime in the past.

However, given that there are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that there was no more severe punishment than a fine, the fact that a mistake is recognized, the depth is against the victim, and the victim has compensated and agreed on the amount of damage, it shall be taken into account. Other factors of sentencing, such as the motive and circumstance of the instant crime as indicated in the trial process and the record of the instant case, circumstances after the instant crime, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and economic conditions, shall be sentenced to the same punishment as the order within