A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Criminal facts

On February 8, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 05:13, 2015, 12 copies of the 12th check, cash, 30,190,000 won, which the victim was placed in the West-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, for the settlement of the cafeteria supply price, and stolen the 1,00,000 won of the 12th check, cash, 30,019,000 won, which was operated by the victim D, “E cafeteria” operated by the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. The application of CCTV photographs, etc. to photographs, such as the body of the suspect, and the provisions of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reports (investigation of seized articles);

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation ]: Type 4 of the thief for general property (special mitigation : Imprisonment : 4 months to 1 year and 6 months): Where a person intrudes into a place other than an indoor residential space (type 4), a person who is not subject to punishment [decision of sentence]: In light of the motive of the instant crime, the number of damages, etc., the fact that there is a heavy nature of the relevant crime, and that there is a history of multiple criminal punishment, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant is recognized as committing the crime of this case and is against the victim, the agreement is reached with the victim, there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the suspended execution, and there is no record of criminal punishment outside the history of criminal punishment once in around 1979.

In this context, the motive and background of the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime, age, character and conduct, occupation, etc. of the defendant are comprehensively taken into account, and the decision is made as ordered by the Supreme Court's sentencing guidelines.