When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

1. 절도 피고인은 2016. 5. 8. 17:00경 김해시 C에 있는 피해자 D 운영의 E 1층 F 매장에서 관리가 소홀한 틈을 이용하여 피해자 소유인 시가 50만원 상당의 여성용 숄더백 가방 1개를 들고 가 이를 절취하였다.

2. The Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) and driven a G Sti-type car without obtaining a driver’s license within a section of about 20 km from the 20km away from the ridge apartment around the floor of the Young-gu, 273 Kim Jong-gu, Kim Jong-si to the above F-ro at the time and time set forth in the above paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Reports on internal investigation (verification of damage and CCTV reading);

1. Application of the Motor Vehicle Driver's License Registers Act and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal theft against criminal facts: Article 329 of the Criminal Act: Subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 43 of the same Act;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act with detention in the workhouse is that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being a person during the period of probation, even though the judgment became final and conclusive on March 18, 2016 at the Changwon District Court on March 18, 2016, and was sentenced to six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution, and the Defendant committed the instant crime without being a person during the period of probation.

The fact that the defendant recognizes each of the crimes of this case and reflects the fact that the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant, that the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant due to the driving without the permission of this case, that the defendant must support two children neglected, that if a sentence is rendered in this case and confirmed, the sentence of the previous suspension of execution is invalidated and the sentence of the previous suspension of execution is invalidated and thus, it seems that it is too harsh, and that the defendant's age and character are personality and behavior.