2. Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that this shall not apply.

On September 5, 2018, at around 00:23, the Defendants and C opened a door of the victim EF App-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p

As a result, Defendants and C stolen the property owned by the victim jointly.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. E statements;

1. Application of evidence screening law to the site of the case

1. Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants subject to discretionary mitigation: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B of a suspended execution: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B on probation: Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A- favorable circumstances: The fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake, agreed with the victim - the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for special larceny, etc. on February 2, 2017. The Defendant repeated the instant crime during the suspended sentence, and the Defendant was sentenced to a fine on August 2017 even though he committed the crime of larceny during the suspended sentence. The Defendant again committed the instant crime.

2. Considerations such as Defendant B - The fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake, agreed with the victim, and the fact that the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment