A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On June 11, 2017, at around 21:40, the Defendant entered the victim D in Gwangju Mine-gu, in front of the Dispute Resolution E, which is managed by the victim D, and did not correct the victim's supervision by using any gap in the victim's supervision, and then intruded the victim into the last part of the dispute Resolution E, which is not corrected, the Defendant was 20 liters via two oil tanks with the transit of an amount equivalent to 40,000 won at the market price stored in the outside oil tank of the building, and was found to have been discovered and attempted by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Protocols of examination of the witness to D of this court;

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

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. On-site photographs, investigation reports (E personnel and CCTV investigation related), investigation reports (related field photographs) [D had oil tanks first viewed in the instant site by the police as consistent from the police to this court, and oil flows out to the oil tank.

A statement is made by the Defendant, on June 11, 2017, at around 19:01, the Defendant left a pattern of oil, similar to the oil tank discovered at the site of the case, in the Defendant’s residence, and the Defendant left a tree path to the site of this case.

However, according to each evidence of the judgment, the defendant's assertion that he left a factory by setting a pllet on the outside of the factory and entering the factory inside the factory is not reliable, and according to the evidence of the judgment, the facts constituting a crime that the defendant invadedd on a structure to steal light can be acknowledged.).

1. Articles 342 and 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the Suspension of Execution ( normal consideration, such as the fact that a crime was committed against an attempted crime and the victim does not want to be punished against the defendant, and that there is no record of punishment for the same crime);