A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

On August 26, 2014, the defendant was sentenced to suspension of indictment for special larceny in the Seoul Dong District Prosecutors' Office on August 26, 2014, and the same power is added once more.

On October 5, 2014, at around 03:30 on October 5, 2014, the Defendant came to “F” operated by the victim E in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and C reported the network on the front side, and the Defendant opened an unlocked window and entered the said gate, and carried one cash safe in the market value, which includes 52,800 won in cash owned by the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property together with C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of suspect C by the prosecution;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. G statements;

1. Records of seizure, list of seizure and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs;

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

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

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 48(1) of the Confiscation Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation ] : Type 4 (Special Mitigation Zone for Larceny) (Special Mitigation Zone from April to January 6) for general property: Where a person intrudes into a place other than an indoor residential space (type 4) and a person not subject to punishment [decision of sentence]: In light of the form of the crime in this case, the method of the crime in question, the method of the punishment, etc., and the fact that the defendant committed the crime in this case at the same time without being aware of the fact that he was subject to the suspension of indictment twice due to the same kind of crime, is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant is recognized as committing the crime of this case and is against the defendant, that the defendant's wife and mother have agreed with the victim smoothly, and that the defendant's wife and mother are seeking the defendant's wife is favorable to the defendant.

In this context, all the conditions of sentencing, including the circumstances after the crime, age, criminal records, character and conduct, family environment, etc., shall be taken into account according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court sentencing committee.