A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

Criminal facts

1. On August 15, 2016, the Defendant: (a) entered the “E” set of “E” operated by the Defendant and living together with the Defendant at Sinsi-si, Sinsi-si; (b) using the gaps in which the surveillance of the victim was neglected, the Defendant entered the said F in the home page, which is the victim’s ownership; (c) without calculating it, went out of the left by the entrance of the calculating unit, which is not the exit right exit; (d) without putting 12 copies of the number of the living trees owned by the victim at hand, the Defendant went out of the entrance of the calculating unit, through the entrance of the calculating unit.

Accordingly, the Defendant, together with F, stolen the property amounting to the total market value of KRW 27,560.

2. A thief: (a) around August 15, 2016, the Defendant entered a H veterinary hospital located in G in Sinung-si on August 2015, 2016, and was placed on the display stand by taking advantage of the gaps in which I’s surveillance, who is an employee of the place, was negligent; (b) the amount equivalent to KRW 50,000 in the market price of the second salary grade of animals owned by the victim J, which is the operator of the said veterinary hospital, was posted in

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of the witness F in the court;

1. A written statement in I and D;

1. Investigation report (to hear statements at the head of the E branch office);

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant and his defense counsel knew that F would calculate the facts charged pursuant to paragraph (1) of this Article, and that F would not have known that the Defendant and his defense counsel stolen the Ascream and the 1st ballot paper.

The following circumstances acknowledged by each of the above evidence, i.e., the defendant, under investigation by the police, stated that F was the person who stolen water from Mart to his house, and that he stolen water from Mart to his decision, and that he stolen it by entering the Schlage in response thereto. However, there is any evidence that the above statement by the defendant was forced by the investigative agency.