A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 25, 2017, the Defendant committed a crime on January 25, 2017: (a) included one of the main body of a computer equivalent to KRW 300,000, which is the victim E-owned from the D Public Notice Board in Daejeon-gu Daejeon around January 17:10, 2017; (b) stored one of the main body of a computer prepared in advance and stolen it.

2. On January 29, 2017, the Defendant: (a) committed the crime of January 29, 2017, with the goods equivalent to KRW 3,350,000,00 in total, including KRW 3,00,000, the market price of Samsung Emart North Korea owned by the victim G (26 years of age) from around 12:00 on January 29, 2017; and (b) with the goods equivalent to KRW 300,00 in the market price of KRW 30,000,000 in the market price of the victim H; (c) with the clothes equivalent to KRW 40,00 in cash, KRW 1,50,00 in the market price, KRW 3,50,00 in the market price, and KRW 80,00 in the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal testimony of H and I for a witness;

1. E statements;

1. Report on the occurrence of theft;

1. A H statement;

1. The criminal place;

1. Each finger photograph (the defendant himself/herself was not stolen, as stated in the facts constituting the crime 2) of Samsung Noh North Korea, H-owned, cash, clothes, etc.;

Although this court stated that the following facts or circumstances revealed by the evidence that the victims were duly adopted and investigated, that is, there was no circumstance that the victims reported false damage; there was no circumstance that the victims invadedd by a third party from the preceding day of the case to the day of the incident by a third party in the Daejeon U.S. F 202, where the Defendant and the victims together with the Defendant, and the Defendant was aware of the victim’s H capital as one’s own; however, the Defendant argued that the Defendant was aware of the victim’s H capital, but not only the size, color, and design of the Defendant’s capital and the victim’s H capital were completely compared (in this court, the size was 2 times different; the design was completely different; the color was entirely different); and the Defendant, like the crime 1, own capital before the date of the crime, was 4 days.