Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. Larceny;

A. On August 20, 2014, at around 23:55, the Defendant: (a) laid down a lines of “D” in Gwangju City; (b) the victim E’s batoned the bat line at the victim’s bat line; (c) the victim’s c.500,000 won or less at the victim’s market price; and (d) stolen the Defendant’s Fpoter trucking vehicle.

B. On September 29, 2014, around 01:10 on September 29, 2014, the Defendant: “H located in Gwangju City G; (a) laid down a line of 700,000 won at the victim’s market price, which is the victim’s possession; and (b) stolen the Defendant’s Fpoter freight onto the Defendant’s Fpoter freight.

2. On November 16, 2014, at around 19:00, the Defendant: (a) acquired 1 mast of windic acid equivalent to 700,000 won at the market price owned by the victim J, who was on board a ship near the Gwangju-si 16-66, Gwangju-si (Seoul-si).

The Defendant did not take necessary procedures such as returning the above gallebs acquired as above to the victim, but did not take necessary procedures, and carried the Defendant’s vehicle on his own, and embezzled the property of which he left the possession of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each written statement of E, I and J;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes such as report on internal investigation (Evidence List 3), CCTV-cap photographs (Evidence List 18,22), investigation report (Evidence List 21);

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment against the crime, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 360 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines, respectively;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act is not only that the defendant was punished several times for the same kind of crime, but also that the court committed the instant crime on July 31, 2014 after being sentenced to a suspended sentence due to the same kind of crime. In light of the fact that this court committed the instant crime on July 31, 2014, there is no doubt as to whether there is a possibility of reflect or not.