A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for six months.

However, this judgment is delivered to the Defendants.

At around 09:50 on March 4, 2014, Defendant A cut off 1, 200, 300,000,000,000 won of the market value of the injured party E, which was in the location of the 200,000 won of the market value of the 3,000,000 won of the market value of the 3,000,000,000 won of the 20,000,000 won of the market value.

Defendant A, around 09:50 on May 28, 2014, intended to cut off the amount of approximately 50 km of the market value of KRW 100,000,000,00 in the possession of residents of the above G residents of the said G, while Defendant A, at around 09:50 on May 28, 2014, attempted to carry approximately 50 km of the market value of KRW 10,000,00,000, in the vehicle for the Defendant’s operation, was discovered to H et al., the head of the said village, and did not commit such attempted.

On June 29, 2014, at around 14:20 on June 29, 2014, Defendant A: (a) opened a door between the victim’s home located in Macheon-si I and opened the house between the victim’s home and entered the place where the victim’s home cannot be identified, and (b) removed 7 pages and 2 Sha-si, Sha-si, where the market price is unknown.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property.

"2014 Highest 3151"

1. Defendant B: (a) around 11:00 on February 14, 2014, at the end of a military unit managed by the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the Army in which the ratio of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the 433th group of the 5th group of the 5th group of the Army; (b)

In addition, the Defendant, from that time until February 17, 2014, stolen each of the property owned by the victim by the aforementioned method five times, as shown in attached Table 1.

2. Defendant A, at around 07:40 on January 27, 2014, at the same place as that set forth in paragraph (1), was a victim who used the gap in which the surveillance by a manager of a military unit who is the victim was neglected, and had been in the site for a prevention.