1. On November 8, 2017, from around 02:53 to around 03:26 of the same day, the Defendant used the victim D, and the lower window window of the F cafeteria operated by the Daejeon Western-gu, Daejeon-gu, the lower court: (a) intruded into the restaurant with the glass window attached to the container, and rupture 1 board (market price of 5,200 won) and five (market price of 15,000 won).

Accordingly, the Defendant destroyed the door at night and intruded into the structure managed by the victim D and E, and stolen the total amount of 20,200 won of the property owned by the victims.

2. From November 12, 2017 to around 03:03:39 of the same day, the Defendant cited food of KRW 28,000 in cash at the payment period for the transfer of the accounting unit, and KRW 28,00 in cash at the time of the transfer of the accounting unit, and KRW 20,000 in the market price in the kitchen air conditioners, from around 03:04 to around the same day.

Accordingly, the Defendant destroyed the door at night and intruded into the structure managed by the victim D and E, and stolen the total amount of KRW 66,000 owned by the victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Written statements of victims;

1. Each investigation report and internal investigation report;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to each photograph and CCTV image data;

1. Article 331 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Although there are favorable circumstances, such as the confession of the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of amount of punishment, the fact that the defendant has been subject to suspended sentence of imprisonment twice for the same kind of crime, and that the defendant again committed the crime of this case even though he had the record of being sentenced to suspended sentence of imprisonment twice for the same crime, and that the nature of the crime is not good in light of the applicable law and content of the crime of this case, the punishment of the defendant is not imposed.