A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On July 17, 2017, the Defendant attempted to larceny at night, after opening the entrance door of the third floor, which was not corrected at around 04:20 on July 17, 2017, to the “D Public Notice Board” managed by A, a member B and C in Ansan-si, an Ansan-si, and intrusion upon the inside, and then intending to steal the goods, but all the doors of the public Notice Board did not lead to such intent.

2. At night, on July 17, 2017, the Defendant: (a) opened a four-story door that was not corrected at the “F published telecom” located in Ansan-si, Ansan-si; (b) opened a 404 entrance door that was located in the said published telecom; and (c) opened a 404 door that was not locked by the victim G residing in the said published telecom, and opened a 404 door that was located in the said published telecom; and (d) cut off the victim’s 880,000 won in cash located in the clothes of the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant abused another's residence at night and stolen the property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement G and C;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Relevant Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime (the points of larceny at night) and Articles 342 and 330 of the Criminal Act (the points of attempted larceny by intrusion upon residence at night);

1. Mitigation of attempted punishment: Articles 25(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

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

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of protection and observation and the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act is deemed to be bad, and the defendant is sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the same kind of crime, and there is a risk of recidivism in light of the circumstances of the crime;

I seem to appear.

However, the defendant shows his attitude against the defendant, the above punishment records are about about 20 years prior to the above punishment records, the crime No. 1 of the ruling is about 870,000 won in cash, the crime No. 2 of the ruling is about 870,000 won in cash and most of the damage is recovered, and the defendant's age, occupation, sex, environment, etc.