However, as to the defendants, two years from the date of this judgment became final and conclusive.

around 15:00 on November 18, 2016, at Hoyang-dong 637, the Defendants: (a) placed in the location at the victim, Co., Ltd., Ltd., the Defendant: (b) placed goods in the Defendant’s official approval bags, which prepared in advance the sum of KRW 15,850,000 for the 15th items of the e-line air conditioners (market 31,710 won) and the 15,000,000 won for the 15,000 items; (c) stored in the shopping car; (d) covered the said shopping car with the e-line cover; and (d) cut off the said e-line with the e-line cover; and (e) cut off the e-line calculating unit.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of a receipt for withholding transactions, closure of video data, and photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Defendants of the relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Articles 331(2) and 331(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Small-scale mitigated Defendants: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants on probation: The reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommendations] / [the grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act / [the scope of punishment ] There is no person who is subject to a special sentencing [the defendant] / [the decision of sentencing] considering the fact that the Defendants already had the record of being subjected to a juvenile protection disposition due to the same kind of crime, and that there is no smooth agreement with the victim / the defendants, the defendants need to be punished strictly. However, although all the defendants led to the confession and reflect of the crime in this case, the amount of damage was not significant, the defendants' age, occupation, sex, and the circumstances after the crime were taken into account.