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

On September 25, 2017, the Defendant, C, and D entered the F2 victim G in Chuncheon-si around 23:00, in a new box of “H” managed by the Defendant and D by the Defendant and D by taking advantage of the gaps of employees’ surveillance negligence, and put C into a bank that brought D a verbal 1 metre on the display stand amounting to KRW 132,00,000 at the market price at which C was placed on the display stand, and the Defendant, according to C’s instructions, made another new attack at the display stand on the display stand, thereby under disguiseding that it was not stolen.

After that, Defendant C, C, and D carried out in a way to take out the door without paying the price.

Accordingly, the Defendant, together with C and D, stolen the property amounting to KRW 132,00 in the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. G statements;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the suspect of the defendant, C, or D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of crime;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 331 (2) and 331 (1) of the Criminal Act that choose a sentence (a point of special larceny);

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate amount of loss (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the grounds for mitigation of the aforementioned amount);