However, the above provisions are applicable to the defendants for two years from the date of the conclusion of the judgment.

On October 13, 2013, around 01:00, the Defendants conspired to steal clothes kept in the above restaurant clothes when they came to the “F” operated by the victim E located in Kim Jong-si.

Defendant

A open the back of “F” and Defendant B, upon entering the following, intruded into a structure managed by the victim, and cited the same by Defendant A as Defendant B, the sum of 1,680,000 won of the market value of the victim’s clothes in the same place, and one set of 1,680,000 won of the market value of the victim’s clothes.

As a result, it is apparent that the Defendants jointly intruded on the above structure and jointly invadedd by the public prosecutor. However, in order to clarify the purport of the indictment, the Defendants appears to have no influence on the guarantee of the Defendant’s right to defense. Therefore, the Defendants added “confiscing the above structure jointly” to facts constituting an offense without going through amendments to indictment or correction procedures.

Joints stolen the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Each police statement of E and G;

1. Protocol of seizure, list and evidential materials attached thereto of the police;

1. A report on the occurrence of a crime, each investigation report, and evidential materials attached thereto;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each theft scene photograph;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense and the Defendants who choose a sentence: Articles 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of each special larceny), Article 2(2) and (1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act (each joint residential intrusion point, each of the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. Defendants from among concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act; and

1. The Defendants are still under the age of the Defendants under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, and the Defendants made a confession of the instant crime through their prison life for a considerable period of time and reflect in depth the mistakes, and the Defendants made an agreement with the victims.