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

1. On October 23, 2012, around 13:30 on October 23, 2012, the Defendant purchased options, interviewing smartphone 1 unit in an amount equivalent to 9.50,000 won at the market price of the victim E, a middle student C, and D stolen by the victim E, in front of the second exit of Changdong, Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and acquired options in an amount equivalent to 600,000 won at the victim’s market price, one unit of smartphone 1 unit, options in an amount equivalent to 600,000 won at the victim’s market price, one unit of smartphone 2,000,000 won at the victim’s H-owned market price, and 8.20,000,000 won at the victim’s market price, with knowledge of the fact that the victim’s E, a victim’s E, acquired samples at the victim’s price of 1,000 won at the victim’s price.

2. On September 27, 2012, around 20:50 on September 27, 2012, the Defendant acquired stolen goods after purchasing 80,000 won of the price knowing that the market price of the victim M that he/she stolen L, a middle student, was at least 90,000 won of the victim M, and observers of 90,000,000 won of the market price of the victim N, with knowledge that it is a stolen goods.

3. On November 24, 2012, around 18:19, the Defendant: (a) purchased stolen goods in front of the river basin in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Gangnam-gu, and (b) acquired stolen goods by purchasing hD smartphone 1 cost with knowledge of the fact that hD smartphone 1 cost is stolen in a gallon, which is equivalent to 900,000 won owned by a high school student, on the road.

4. On December 6, 2012, around 17:36, the Defendant: (a) purchased a stolen article in front of the river basin of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Gangnam-gu, and (b) acquired a stolen article by purchasing it at 30,000 won, knowing that it is a stolen charge, in the name of a victim who stolen by a high school student O, the market price of which is equivalent to 900,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect against theO;

1. Each police statement about D, C, or L;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police seizure records;

1. Article 362 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. The Criminal Act among concurrent crimes.