Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Defendant

A shall be exempted from punishment for A.

(b) have hereds. He/she takes hereds.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. E statements;

1. Photographs of the criminal scene;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a written reply to inquiries, such as each criminal history, and each investigation report (Evidence List Nos. 18, 19, 21, 24, 25, 28);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts;

(a) Defendant A: Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act

B. Defendant B: Articles 5-4(5)1, 331(2) and 331(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes

1. Aggravationd criminal defendant B: Article 35 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A who handles concurrent crimes: After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1);

1. Defendant B who is to be mitigated: Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A exempted from punishment: Reasons for sentencing under the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of the punishment according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court (Defendant B)] [the basic area (one year to six months), basic area (one year to three years), under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (joint and repeated larceny)] * One year - three years [decision of sentence] according to the minimum applicable sentences under the law, all of the Defendants committed the crimes of the same law again despite the fact that they had been punished several times for the same kind of crime.

The crime of this case is not a crime for the purpose of acquiring and collecting fingers themselves, but a crime for the purpose of preventing other larceny by using fingers.

However, the damage is a relatively small product with economic value.

In addition, in the case of Defendant A, the principle of equity with the case of each special larceny, etc. in which the judgment has already become final and conclusive should be taken into account. Even if each of the above special larceny, etc. and the crime of this case has been adjudicated at the same time, no sentence may be imposed more than that set forth in each final and conclusive judgment. On the other hand, the statutory penalty for the special larceny of this case is “a prison term of not less than one year but not more than ten years”