Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the defendant A for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On June 28, 2015, around 05:12, 05:00, Defendants and D discovered that the Victim G was locked in the F Bana, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, and sought to cut off the cell phone of the victim, and D and Defendant A reported the network in the victim included, and Defendant B brought about the Samsung No. 4 cell phone of the market value equivalent to KRW 1100,000,00,000 at the market value of the victim, located adjacent to the victim.

Accordingly, the defendants stolen the victim's property together with D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Examination protocol of police suspect regarding D;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes for explanation of CCTV photographs;

1. Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Defendant A);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order (Defendant A) of the Criminal Act / [the scope of recommending punishment] mitigated area (six months to one year) of category 3 of the thief for general property / [the decision of sentence] Defendant A [the decision of sentence] Defendant A: the first offender; the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual consent with the victim; the victim's age, character and behavior and environment; motive, means and consequence of the crime; and other conditions of sentencing specified in the arguments of this case, such as circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as the order.

Defendant

B: Although the victim did not want to be punished by the defendant, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months at the Gwangju District Court on May 21, 2014 on the grounds of fraud, etc. on May 21, 2014, which became final and conclusive on May 29, 2014, but committed the instant crime without faithfully complying with community service order and probation, the degree of participation in the instant crime is most severe, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive for the instant crime, and motive for the criminal act.