Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

At around 14:02 on September 6, 2018, the Defendants: (a) discovered a bank set up on a tree’s front of a public toilet located in the “North Sea Park” in the Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong; (b) discovered a bank set up by the victim C; (c) reported the surrounding areas; and (d) reported the network; and (e) the Defendant A used double bags of a smartphone with approximately KRW 50,000 in the market price of KRW 2,00,000 in a vinyl amounting to KRW 10,00 in the market price, which is the victim’s ownership.

As a result, the defendants stolen the victim's property together.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. C’s statement;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting a crime (the defendants)

1. Discretionary mitigation (of the defendants) Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of each Criminal Act;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Six to five years of imprisonment;

2. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [Determination of types] thief for general property [Class 1] thief [the scope of the recommended punishment] and no person [the scope of the recommended punishment] thief [the scope of the recommended punishment and the recommended punishment] basic area, four to eight months from imprisonment [the scope of the recommended punishment corrected according to the applicable sentencing] 6 months to eight months from imprisonment (the lowest limit of the sentencing range recommended by the sentencing guidelines is inconsistent with the statutory minimum limit of the applicable sentencing range, and it is in accordance with the statutory minimum limit of the applicable sentencing range).

3. In addition to the background and method of the instant crime, the degree of damage is not much severe, and some damaged items have been returned, and all the Defendants have an attitude of recognizing and opposing the mistakes, and there is no force other than the fine. In addition, all the sentencing conditions as shown in the pleadings, such as the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, shall be comprehensively considered.