The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

In light of the legal principles on the gist of grounds for appeal (the attempted larceny at night on August 17, 2017) the Defendant was unable to steal money and valuables any longer after intrusion upon E multiples around August 17, 2017. Therefore, the Defendant constitutes an attempted abandonment because he/she voluntarily ceased to commit the crime.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which did not recognize the attempted suspension of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and affected the judgment.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (the imprisonment of two years and six months, confiscation, and collection) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of legal principles: ① on August 17, 2017, on the day of the instant case, the Defendant was on the 02:17, moving his car to the Dondong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si, and did not intrude into the AP due to correction; again, on around 03:25, the Defendant moved to the AP around 03:30, parked the car; ② immediately the Defendant moved to the 2nd floor above the 03:3rd building, and worn to the 3rd apartment-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si; ② the Defendant did not have been able to use the money and valuables at the 3rd-dong-dong-si-dong-si-dong-si.

Since it is reasonable to see this part of the crime, the suspension index is not applied.