A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

1. The Defendant: (a) extract from the victim G in the north-gu, Daegu Metropolitan City on September 19, 2017, the victim G in B, C, D, E, and on September 19, 2017, the Defendant: (b) use a cresh operated by the victim G in North-gu, Daegu Metropolitan City; (c) use a cresh, B, C, D, and E, from the surrounding areas; and (d) use a cresh, B, C, D, and E, around which no surveillance is performed; and (e) the Defendant take two animal-types of at least 40,000 won in the market value and three balls of the market value in the machine by inserting their arms or bodies into the artificial outlet of the extracted machine.

They go back.

As a result, the defendant stolen five races of the victim together with B, C, D, and E.

2. The Defendant damaged property at the same time and at the same place as paragraph 1, and during the process of cutting down a man-made figure by inserting arms and body into a machine extracted from a type, such as paragraph 1, the Defendant 2 stringed two man-made shapes.

Accordingly, the Defendant damaged two type-sized machinery extracted from the victim's possession to be equivalent to 500,000 won of repair cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the accused, C, E, D, or B;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (to attachCCTV photographs), report on the occurrence of disasters (thief, etc.);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of special larceny) and Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of destroying property and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor);

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. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act committed the instant crime even though the Defendant had been sentenced to a fine for the same kind of crime, the sentence of suspended sentence is to be rendered against the Defendant, taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant has committed the instant crime against his/her own mistake; (b) the Defendant has committed the instant crime contingent; (c) the Defendant’s age was the Green Age; and (d) the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment other than the said fine and juvenile protection case.