A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

"2018 Highest 799"

1. On October 17, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 14:35, around 17, 2017, around 14:35, brought up a thielet 9 of the victim D-owned market price equivalent to KRW 22,50, and KRW 15 of the market price; and (b) a thielet 142,500 in total amount of damage; and (c) a thielet tran and plastic tran tran in a truck loaded with the victim D-owned market price of KRW 12,50.

In addition, from January 13, 2018, the Defendant: (a) taken 2,407,50 won of the total amount of damage as indicated in the list of offenses in attached Table 2,407,50 and 140 of the tree soft 515 and plastic soft 140 of the total amount of damage; (b) around January 18, 2018, the Defendant attempted to larceny. (c) around January 17:10, 2018, around 17:10, 200, 60 of the victim D’s market price stored in G located in G located in Gwangju City, which was distributed to H and attempted to commit a crime.

On April 30, 2018, the Defendant, at around 18:40 on April 30, 2018, cut off 5 thirret (for the purpose of transporting chemical products) at the victim J located in Gwangju-si, which was accumulated at the entrance of the victim J at the victim J located in Gwangju-si, on April 30, 2018.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement by a witness, L or J;

1. Written statements of D, L and J;

1. On-site photographing photographs, CCTV closure photographs, and specifications of damaged articles;

1. Investigation report (as to the statement of the M representative director), investigation report (as to the statement of the C representative director), investigation report (as to the counter investigation of the C staff), investigation report (as to the counter investigation of the C manager in charge of wastes), investigation report (as to the counter investigation of the victim J), investigation report

1. On the other hand, the victim’s internal investigation report (the victim’s internal investigation) alleged to the effect that it was not stolen against the victim’s will because the victim’s internal investigation report (the defendant and the defense counsel first obtained the victim’s consent to collect patht from the victim’s license). However, according to each of the aforementioned evidence, at least from September 2016, the victim’s victim was the defendant.