A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 12, 2015, the Defendant committed the crime, around 16:00 on February 12, 2015, using the gap in which the victim D was locked in front of Yacheon-gu, Seocheon-gu C, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, and used the gap in which the victim D was locked, thereby cutting off 1,00 won of the market price of each of the victim’s possession in the work team and 1,00 won of ham.

2. On February 24, 2015, the Defendant committed the crime: (a) around 11:15, on February 14, 2015, using the gap in which the victim D was locked in front of the YY E in Bupyeong-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu; (b) 1,000 won of the market price of the victim, which is the victim’s possession of fluent rice fluor, was stolen.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the statement statement made to D by the police;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on Probation and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc.;

1. The scope of the advisory sentence: the scope of crimes No. 1 (Scope of Recommendation) and the scope of final sentence due to the aggravation of multiple offenses for which there are no basic fields (6 months to 1 year and 6 months) (the scope of Recommendation), the basic fields (6 months to 6 months), the basic fields (1 year and 6 months), the basic fields (6 months to 6 months), the basic fields (1 year and 6 months), (2 months from 6 months to 3 months);

2. Normal circumstances favorable to the determination of sentence: The defendant seems to have led to the confession of the crime of this case and to repent his mistake, and some damage therefrom are not large, which are disadvantageous: The defendant committed the crime of this case again even though he was already sentenced to a fine twice due to the same kind of crime, and considering the fact that the amount of damage is not significant, etc., the situation under Article 51 of the Criminal Act shall be comprehensively taken into account, including the fact that the defendant has committed the crime of this case, and the punishment is determined as ordered by the order beyond