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

However, 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

The defendant had been willing to commit a crime in an economically lacking situation and enter a prison with a convenience store in order to keep money.

On August 21, 2018, the Defendant entered a convenience store located in Sinpo-si, South and North 02:30 on August 21, 2018, and from this point to the victim D (31 tax) who is an employee, “as soon as possible give money and report to the police”, and then requested money from the victim.

It does not want to cause damage to the test of “a threat fluorly fluor as it speaks “....”

It is whether to pay an excessive amount of money.

If a credit cooperative does not refuse to pay money promptly, the credit cooperative called "the victim is frighten, and 2.80,000 won in cash was delivered to the victim, who is frighten, and frighten.

Accordingly, the defendant received property by threatening the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Investigation report (verification of CCTV images at convenience stores);

1. Application of seizure records and statutes concerning the list of seizure;

1. Relevant Article 350 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 350 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. Although the nature of the instant crime is not good in light of the background and method of the instant crime committed by threatening the victim who works in a convenience store, alone, at the night of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., taking into account the favorable circumstances as seen below), the Defendant’s mistake is against the victim in depth, the entire damage was returned to the victim, and some of the circumstances that may be considered in light of the motive of the instant crime.

In addition, there is no same criminal history for the defendant.

It is so decided as per Disposition in consideration of such circumstances and various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the instant pleadings.