However, as to the Defendants for three years from the date of the final judgment of this case, the Defendants are above.

around 04:06 on May 12, 2013, at the “F convenience store” operated by the victim E (the age of 49) in Yangju-si, the Defendants: (a) prepared in advance, and (b) obstructed the Defendants from resisting the Defendant by stating that the Defendant’s excessive (not less than 300cm in the blade length) which is a deadly weapon in the victim’s chest, and (c) “Induction of, and within, the amount of money.” (b) the Defendant B got the victim whose resistance is tensiond into the Twitter by opening the safe, thereby reducing the cash that was contained in the said safe.

As a result, the Defendants jointly adopted the amount of 276,00 won in cash owned by the victim with a deadly weapon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Each investigation report (in-depth CCTV investigations, comparison between seized materials and CCTV for convenience stores);

1. Records of each seizure and photographs of each seized article;

1. Application of CCTV video-related Acts and subordinate statutes to crimes;

1. Articles 334 (2) and (1), and 333 of the Criminal Act: Defendants who choose the applicable laws and punishment for the crimes: Articles 334 (2) and (1), and 33 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants subject to discretionary mitigation: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Defendants of a suspended sentence: The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the “consumption for sentencing”)

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment of not less than two years and not more than 6 months but not more than 15 years; and

2. Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing guidelines: The Defendants’ respective types of robbery, general standards, types 2 (Special Robbery) (Special Robbery): Reduction element of punishment (the scope of recommendation area and recommendation area), mitigation area, reduction area of punishment, suspension of execution of imprisonment of not less than 2 years and 6 months and not more than 4 years (whether suspension of execution is suspended of execution of sentence): positive use of dangerous articles - positive use of dangerous articles - Reasons for general non-compliance of punishment - negative planned crimes - negative and planned crimes, evidence after crimes - positive reflections, and no more criminal records of suspended execution of sentence are found to have been committed;

3. Determination of sentence: The crimes of this case committed in two and half years of imprisonment by each of the Defendants and three years of suspended execution.