Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

However, from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, Defendant.

Punishment of the crime

On August 1, 2012, the Defendants conspiredd to steal money and valuables from drunk persons on or around 03:20, the Defendants discovered the victim D while under the influence of alcohol from subway No. 7 lines in the subway set-dong, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, while displaying the person subject to the crime, and found the victim D, Defendant B was seated on the Otoba, and had a network of coming from the surrounding persons. Defendant A her 50,000 won check from the back part of the victim’s back part, and Defendant A her flapsed up one colored with the victim’s market price of 300,000,000 won.

As a result, the defendants stolen the property owned by the victim together.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Statement of each police statement of D and E;

1. A report on investigation (referring to cases where answers and photographs are available at the scene of crime);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to details of the check of victims, CCTV photographs, credit card photographs, and photographs at crime scene;

1. Article 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended execution;

1. The scope of the recommended sentence for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on Probation: Defendant A’s period of six months to one year (limited to mitigation), and Defendant B’s period of eight months to two years (basic areas) cannot be deemed to be less than the nature of the crime in light of the background and method of the crime in this case. Defendant B attempted to impose liability only on Defendant A after committing the crime, and Defendant B attempted to have the same kind of penalty power.

However, Defendant A agreed to pay KRW 1.2 million to the victim, and due to the suspension of payment of a check, the victim’s damage was recovered, such as the occurrence of damage equivalent to the check amount.

The Defendants did not have any criminal record exceeding the fine, and the Defendants committed a mistake.

These circumstances and other reasons for sentencing, including the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, and environment.