When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On May 6, 2017, the Defendant: (a) stolen the victim’s property by using food, such as nudrum hump hump hump humbling, which is the victim’s own market value, in the EMt “E” operated by the victim D in Gui-si, Gui-si; and (b) instead of calculating the following amount, the Defendant stolen the victim’s property by using food, such as nudum hump humbling, which is the victim’s own market value,

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement of the F;

1. Investigation report (as to on-site arrest and victim's statement);

1. Application of the video-related Acts and subordinate statutes to the victim of a crime, such as a receipt of damaged articles, a work pocketbook - a notice letter, a visual blife photograph of a visual blife photograph, damaged photo, a suspect-flife photograph, a closed receipt of damaged articles, and a visual blife bl if the victim committed a crime

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the reason for sentencing is not applicable as a penalty decision) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the sentencing criteria are not applied as a penalty decision) recognizes the defendant's mistake, and his depth is divided.

In agreement with the victim, the injured person does not want to punish the accused.

It seems that the mental illness of which the defendant is suffering is partly affected by raising a mixed child.

In addition, the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of various sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.