However, for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive against the Defendants.

On May 2, 2014, at around 17:00, the Defendants came to the front of the Central Library of the Chungcheongnam-gu, Seo-gu, Seowon-si Central Library at 52, Seowon-si, Chungcheongnam-si, and Defendant B found the key of Otoba, which was in possession of the victim’s D E 50cc mixed with the victim’s D, was stored in the above Obaba, and confirmed that it was fit for the above Oba, by putting the key into the above Obaba, and Defendant A was sealed by the theft prevention assistant lock (one name : one Turkey), thereby pushing the above key from Defendant B, and Defendant B was driving the above Obaba.

As a result, the Defendants committed a theft of the victim's market price of KRW 900,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Prosecutorial suspect interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Written statements prepared in D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing investigation reports (related to field CCTV), site photographs, photographs of suspected vehicles, and objects photographs of used sites;

1. Article 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds that the defendants reflect a mistake, agreed with the victim, and completely recovered from damage);

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for the reason of not less than Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;