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

On August 21, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 16:17, the South Jindo-gun, Jindo-do bus terminal 5 Jindo-do, Jindo-gun, Jindo-gun, the Defendant: (b) taken advantage of the gap in which the victim B confirmed the bus time table of the bus in locked-si; and (c) taken advantage of the gap in which the victim B carried the bus time table on his will, the Defendant cut off the 30,000 won of the market price which the victim opened on his will, she cited three and 5 finite plastic bags.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. B written statements;

1. Photographss, such as damaged articles, and CCTV images of Jindo bus terminals, and caps and images of Jindo bus terminals;

1. Each investigation report and investigation report (including CD attachment, accompanying CD attachment, etc. that white images of the CCTV of Jindo bus terminal) / The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant did not have the intent of larceny because, as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment, the Defendant brought about the victim’s goods, but, under the influence of alcohol, brought about the reduction of goods owned by the Defendant.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the court's legitimate examination of evidence are as follows: ① The police officer on the day of the instant case asked questions about the damaged goods of this case at the defendant's house and the defendant stated that he purchased the goods except for the cupped World Cup, in which the defendant had been in a spons, but the investigation agency had no mind that the defendant had purchased the goods in the spons.

The statement was made that it is not consistent with the statement and it is difficult to recognize its credibility in light of its attitude, etc. ② The CCTV images installed at the place where the crime was committed in this case, and the defendant did not have been seated by the person inside the waiting room of the Jindo bus terminal with the damaged goods in this case, but it is possible to confirm the fact that he gets out of the bus with the damaged goods in front of the above doctor's seat while putting the damaged goods in front of the above doctor's seat and putting the damaged goods in front of the plaintiff's seat, and let him out the bus with his own goods on the left hand. In light of the defendant's behavior shown in the above video, etc.