However, from the date of the conclusion of the judgment, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for one year.

On April 3, 2013, at around 02:13, the Defendants discovered the victim G from the third floor of the Fju point located in Daegu Jung-gu E with the second floor to dance, and conspired with the thefter.

Accordingly, Defendant B and D reported the network, Defendant A passed through a smartphone on the table, Defendant A cut the floor with left hand, and immediately walked a smartphone with the opposite direction, and Defendant B and D left one of Samsung Gallon 2 smartphones, the market price of the victim's ownership of which is equivalent to KRW 1 million.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the property owned by the victim jointly.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol against D, H, and I;

1. Each police statement to G and J;

1. Application of CCTV photographs and mobile phone photographs Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do1148, Apr. 1, 201; 201Do1148, Apr. 2

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act for a suspended sentence (the grounds for discretionary mitigation repeated);