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

At around 15:00 on March 13, 2017, the Defendant: (a) purchased from D’C 'C’ located in Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B Building 507, a high-speed, the market price of which is equivalent to KRW 83 million, which he stolen from the victim E’s residence; (b) KRW 13 million in total; (c) KRW 11.5 million in total; (d) KRW 7; (e) KRW 8.7 million in total of the market price; and (e) KRW 1.6 million in total at KRW 1.6 million in market price; and (e) KRW 1.6 million in total at the market price; and (e) KRW 1.6 million in total at KRW 5 million in market price; and (e) KRW 700,00 in total at the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the records of seizure, list of seizure and investigation report (a copy of forwarding documents);

1. Relevant Article 362 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 362 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution (a) of the Criminal Act (the fact that confessions and reflects, some of the stolens acquired by the defendant have already been returned to the victim, the fact that there is no record of the same crime, and that there is no penalty exceeding the fine, under favorable circumstances, all of the stolens acquired by the defendant was disposed of, and the fact that the stolens acquired by the defendant did not receive a letter from the damaged person are considered disadvantageous

1. The community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;