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

피고인은 2015. 5. 29. 16:50 경 천안시 서 북구 C에 있는 피해자 D이 운영하는 E 금은 방에서, 피해자에게 시가 1,970,000원 상당의 금 목걸이 1개를 구입할 것처럼 말하여 이를 건네받은 후 목에 걸어 보는 시늉을 하며 도주하여 절취하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made in each police statement with respect to D or F;

1. Statement of the investigation report (the preliminary investigation of the victim as the other party suspect);

1. Statement on identity verification of the fingerprints of the larceny case;

1. Application of each video statute to field photographs, escape photographs, CCTV photographs, CCTV photographs, and photographs on the site of seized objects;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 329 of the choice of punishment;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (including the circumstances favorable to the following grounds for sentencing);

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for not less than one month but not more than six years;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended punishment] [the type] of larceny, and the type two (general larceny) of the theft against general property [the scope of the recommended punishment] that is not subject to the punishment (the scope of the recommended punishment], for not less than four months but not more than ten months;

3. Determination of sentence: The defendant, who was sentenced to a stay of six months of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of not less than 1970,000 won, steals and the case is not less than that against him; the defendant has been punished twice (one time of actual punishment, one time of suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, and five times of fines) by committing the same type of crime; the defendant has been sentenced to eight times (8 times of actual punishment, two times of suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, one time of the suspension of the execution of the sentence) by committing the same type of crime; the defendant has escaped from the date of the pronouncement of the judgment (the execution of detention warrant after the execution of the judgment); on the other hand, the defendant repaid the damage to the victim; the defendant has no record of criminal punishment exceeding a fine after around 203; and the defendant has recognized the crime without any history of criminal punishment exceeding a fine; and the sentence shall be determined as ordered by the text