A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and for four months, respectively.

However, from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, Defendant.

1. On February 1, 2016, Defendant A, at the victim G (ju) factory located in Singu, Singu, around 01:45, he took possession of 15 million won at the market price of the victim’s possession, and was stolen with 36.6 million won at the market price of the victim’s ownership from March 30, 2015 to February 1, 2016, as indicated in attached Table 1, as shown in attached Table 1.

2. On February 1, 2016, Defendant B acquired 36.6 million old interest rate of KRW 15 million from March 30, 2015 to February 1, 2016, as indicated in attached Table 2, from around 12, 2015 to February 1, 2016, the Defendant acquired 3,6.6 million old interest rate of KRW 6,100,000, total market value of the victim’s possession, which was the stolen property, from around 12 times, from around 30, 2015 to around 1, 206.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made by the police to J;

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

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

(a) Defendant A: Article 329 of the Criminal Act (Options of imprisonment);

B. Defendant B: Article 362(1) of the Criminal Act (the choice of imprisonment)

1. Defendants who are subject to aggravated concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendant A of the community service order: Defendant A [the scope of the recommended punishment] for the reason of sentencing of Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act; Defendant A [the scope of punishment] for general property; Defendant A [the scope of the final sentence according to the aggravation of multiple offenses (from June to January 1) for the basic area (the general larceny): Six months to nine months] : the amount of damage to the instant crime is high; Defendant A had a record of being punished twice for larceny in 2005 and 209 (the amount of damage to the instant crime; KRW 300,000; KRW 1 year of suspended sentence for April); Defendant A was unable to agree with the victim; Defendant A [the extent of punishment] for the benefit of general property; Defendant 4,015 km among damaged goods was seized and returned.