A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Defendant

A from December 2016 to June 2018, the victim C and Daegu Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D have operated the sales of precious metals and the sprinking and processing business of “E”, and the Defendants are sprinklings.

1. On March 5, 2018, Defendant A’s thief, around 19:30 on March 5, 2018, Defendant A opened a credit cooperative password without the consent of the victim to obtain a 200,000 won in cash owned by the victim, by putting the gap in which other employees are not present at the above “E” office, and opening a credit cooperative password in which other employees are aware of the secret number of the credit cooperative in the office.

Accordingly, the Defendant stolen the property owned by the victim.

2. On June 8, 2018, Defendants joined the said “E” office with a crepancies without any victim, and the victim took one copy of the above “E” office lease contract that was kept in his/her book.

Accordingly, the Defendants committed a theft of the property owned by the victim jointly.

Summary of Evidence

1. The witness C’s statement in the court (the defendant A was unable to pay service fees due to his/her failure to take cash out upon obtaining C’s consent. The defendants asked C to contact the lessor who did not implement the promise to notarized the loan certificate with the intent to notify C of the deposit money and put the lease contract out of the idea that C did not have any intention to larceny. However, the defendants asserted that there was no intention to larceny. However, the following circumstances acknowledged by this court, which were duly adopted and investigated by this court, were not confirmed by the monetary details between the defendant A and the victim C on March 5, 2018; the defendants used the lease contract as attached documents at the time of filing a civil lawsuit on August 2018; and the defendants did not return the lease contract to C, the above defendants’ assertion is rejected).

1. Complaints, written statements by the police against C;

1. The photographic and sales account book of each stimule;