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

around 00:40 on December 27, 2017, the Defendant: (a) opened a 1st floor room underground of the D Hospital located in Jinju-si, Jin-si, and intruded into it, and cut off one point of KRW 100,000 of the market price of the victim E owned by the victim E, which is equivalent to KRW 30,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.

On September 5, 2018, 2018, the Defendant, at G stores located in Jinnam-si, Jinnam-si around 12:50 on September 12:50, 2018, took advantage of the gaps in the surveillance of employees, including victims H(45 years of age), and stolen one piracy in an amount equivalent to 2,000 won at the market price.

Summary of Evidence

"2018 Highest 145"

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement protocol by the police for E;

1. CCTV images;

1. Protocol of seizure: 2018 Maz. 1248;

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A H statement;

1. Application of CCTV Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense and Article 329 of the Criminal Act;

1. Larceny of option of punishment: Imprisonment;

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. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) A crime No. 1 - The sentence for recommending the theft of a structure at night: A person subject to special sentencing in August to January (a mitigated area): Where he/she intrudes into a place, other than an indoor residential space;

(b) 2nd offence - The sentence of thief recommended for theft: the sentence of special sentencing between April and October (a mitigated area): the sentence of living penalty;

(c) Many crimes: From August to January 2; and

2. The sentencing factors, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances of this case, means and results, etc., in light of the fact that each sentencing factor and the Defendant had been sentenced to a fine twice as a result of larceny, and all of the sentencing conditions as shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered