1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months;

2.Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

Punishment of the crime

1. On November 18, 2017, the Defendant: (a) discovered an unclaimed cutting machine at the market price of the victim’s name unowned loss in front of the entrance of the Gando-Eup at the Namyang-do-si, Namyang-do-si; (b) discovered it on his hand; and (c) stolen it with the Defendant’s vehicle loaded.

2. The Defendant, along with C and D on November 18, 2017, was driving a vehicle within the Sungyang-si Corporation located in the Namyang-si, Namyang-do around 03:20 on November 18, 2017, led to the discovery of 124cc BGF125 large-scale ocs owned by the victim F (38 tax) who was parked in this area, and while C and D are viewed to have a network, the Defendant cut a stolen ocsp and cut off the locks of 쇠s connected to the above Ocsba, and then oca carried the oca, using the keys of the said ocaba, and C driven the said oca, while driving the ocaba.

Accordingly, the Defendant, together with C and D, stolen 3.2 million won or less at the market price of the victim's possession.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of each police in relation to C or D;

1. A statement prepared by the F;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes, such as CCTV images and images;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act (abstinence point, choice of imprisonment), Article 331 (2) and Article 331 (1) of the Criminal Act (abstinence point) concerning criminal facts;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes with heavy special larceny);

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s assertion on the protection observation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection and Observation, etc. of Social Service Order is not the Defendant but D, and thus, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant is not the Defendant. As such, the following facts, which are acknowledged by the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, i.e., the Oralbane starting-up.