Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 19, 2020, the Defendant: (a) at the “C” store on the first floor of the building B in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu; and (b) at the “C” store in Jung-gu, Seoul; and (c) at the victim D, displayed there was a gap in surveillance negligence; (d) at the victim D’s 210,000 won, the Defendant stolen it with a single set of 2,10,000 won.

2. At around 14:16 on the same day, the Defendant stolen the “E” store on the first floor of the building B, with a single, 18,000 won, and a single set of money, instant instant World Cup, and softt, which was maintained by the victim displayed there by taking advantage of the gaps where surveillance was neglected.

3. At around 14:40 on the same day, the Defendant stolen the cans with one “one,68,000 won” in the “G store on the 5th floor of the F building,” and then cut off “one cans with one cans of “one,68,00 won.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. A photograph of seized articles, photograph of the suspect, the criminal place, and a written acceptance of flagrant offender;

1. CCTV video CDs;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (to hear statements of witnesses D and hear statements of witnesses H);

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime;

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

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order [the scope of punishment] 50,000 won to 15,000 won to 15,000 won to 15,000 won to 1,50,000 won to 20 won to 200 won to 200 won to 200 won to be sentenced to criminal punishment for the same crime prior to the instant case. Each of the instant crimes was favorable to the Defendant, such as that each theft was temporarily returned. However, each of the instant crimes was committed by the Defendant with the interview or interview of displayed goods at several stores in the same department store, and the crime was committed in light of the background, method, place, frequency, etc. of the