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

On November 27, 2016, around 23:00, the Defendant: (a) opened a string door of the 2nd apartment of Pakistan, the center of Busan Shipping Daegu, the center of 142, and the 2nd apartment of Pakistan, which was parked by the Defendant; (b) opened a string door of the 3rd apartment of the 2nd apartment of the 2nd apartment of the 2nd apartment of the 2nd apartment of the 2nd apartment of the 2nd apartment of the 2nd apartment; and (c) committed theft with 1.5 million won of the market price owned by the said 1.5 million won of the 3rd mobile phone, which was parked by the victim B, from around that time to around 0:45 of the following day, the Defendant did not commit a theft by the said means, such as the list of crimes committed by the 12th day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements of victims;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on generation (thief) and a criminal investigation report (to attachCCTV images);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting a crime, Article 329 of the Criminal Act that selects punishment (the point of larceny), Articles 342 and 329 of the Criminal Act (the point of attempted larceny) and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and Article 62-2 of the community service order is that the defendant committed the larceny crime 12 times in a short time, which is very poor in the nature of the crime, and the defendant has two same criminal records.

However, in consideration of the fact that the defendant repents his mistake, the fact that the defendant agreed with the victims of the crime that led to the theft, the defendant has no record of the crime exceeding the fine, and the reasons for the sentencing specified in this case, the punishment shall be determined as ordered.