However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

At around 02:40 on April 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) opened a main entrance that was not corrected in the “D” restaurant operated by the victim C in Gwangju City; and (b) went into the Kack cash account unit, and stolen KRW 20,000,000 in cash owned by the victim, which was kept in the Kacter cash account unit.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of E;

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 (1) of the Act on Probation, etc.;

1. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) Determination of types: thief by intrusion into four categories of general property;

(b) A special person: Where a person intrudes into a place other than an indoor residential space, the person is not subject to punishment;

(c) Scope of recommendation: Imprisonment for up to one year and six months; and

(d) Suspension of execution: the previous department (for at least five years of suspension of execution, reasons for negative participation), grounds for non-taxation, grounds for non-esteem in punishment, and reasons for non-compensation in pride;

2. There is a criminal record of which one year has been sentenced to a suspended sentence in April, 201 due to a crime of larceny in 198, a crime of violation of a night building in 2005, the suspension of indictment due to night-time larceny in 2006, the suspension of indictment due to a crime of attempted special larceny in 2010.

However, at night, there is no significant risk of intrusion on a restaurant after the business was completed, and there was an agreement with the victim, and the damaged goods were recovered at the site.

In consideration of all these points, the same type as the order shall be determined.