However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On December 20, 2016, the Defendant: (a) discovered that the victim D was in a parking lot in front of a restaurant located in Ansan-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Ansan-si; (b) discovered the victim D while disputing her husband; and (c) cut off the bank on the floor of the parking lot; and (d) cut off the amount equivalent to KRW 200,000,000 at the market price of the vehicle for the vehicle of an amount of KRW 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won; (b) one 14,000,000,000 won at the market price of KRW 8,000,00,000 at the market price; and (c) one 2,456,000,000,000,000,000 won at the market price of the national bank.

2. On December 20, 2016, the Defendant attempted to larceny the amount owned by the victim by exposing the cash withdrawal period for managing the victim G, which is located in the “EF EF E” in Ansan-si, Ansan-si, Ansan-si, Ansan-si, Masan-si. As seen in the preceding paragraph, the Defendant: (a) posted the stolen national bank credit card at a cash withdrawal period; and (b) entered a password on the back of the credit card; (c) but (d) was suspended from withdrawal due to the reporting on loss of the credit card at issue; and (d) subsequently, the Defendant attempted to steal the amount owned by the victim

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of D;

1. The case photographic record (CCTV investigation - the commission of crime)

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (inform photographs of the ATM apparatus site and photographs of a mer of letters refusing to approve);

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime (the point of Section 329 of the Criminal Act), Articles 342 and 329 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor, respectively;

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

1. The execution of a sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act shall be suspended in consideration of the fact that the amount of damage on the grounds of sentencing is not much significant and that damage has not been recovered, but considering the fact that the defendant has no previous convictions in excess of the same criminal records or fines, the execution of the sentence shall