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

In order to prepare entertainment expenses, etc., along with D known to the Defendant through C and C, the Defendant resolved to steals articles, etc. located on another person's vehicle.

1. Special larceny - The Defendant discovered the Victim E-owned G Kanop vehicle that was set up in front of the F at regular Eup on July 30, 2012.

The defendant looked at another person's access in the vicinity, and D and C opened a door door of the above vehicle that is not corrected into the vehicle, and have a large range of 200,000 won of the cell phone with the confirmation of the galletho road on the part of the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property together with C and D.

2. Special larceny - The Defendant discovered the victim H H-owned J Kanop vehicle that was set up in front of the Si/Y at regular Eup on August 2, 2012, around 02:00.

The defendant reported the network around the above vehicle, and C opened the entrance door of the above vehicle, and entered the entrance, and possessed two copies of cash 50,000 won check owned by the victim in the above vehicle.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property together with C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect by the police against C or D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each statement;

1. Article 331 (2) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

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. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do349, Jan. 1, 201);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;