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

Punishment of the crime

On May 16, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in Busan District Court on May 16, 201, and completed the execution of the sentence on October 3, 2014.

1. Theft and damage to property;

A. On May 5, 2015, the Defendant: (a) damaged the victim E’s FM5 si in the D Indones Building located in the Busan Maritime Transportation Daegu; (b) destroyed the Plaintiff’s Dagber’s Dog on the date on which the Defendant prepared for the rear Dog’s 100,000 driver’s Dog in advance; and (c) destroyed the Plaintiff’s Dog’s Dog’s Dog’s Dog’s Dog’s Dog by opening the door, thereby cutting down the amount equivalent

B. On May 5, 2015, around 04:24, the Defendant: (a) destroyed a victim H’s IG taxi at the underground parking lot of the GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG, using the

2. Attempted theft and damage to property;

A. On May 5, 2015, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the instant taxi at the first floor parking lot of the 679 Kasi Apartment apartment in Busan, Busan, the Defendant: (b) destroyed the Plaintiff’s K-si in the first floor of the 679 Kasi; (c) was prepared in advance for driving 120,000 won in the market price; and (d) was taken out in cash by opening the doors of the said taxi; (d) did not have the intent to do so due to the lack of cash.

B. The Defendant continued to damage the victim LM taxi at the date and place specified in the above paragraph (a) by using the dricker prepared in advance for driving 220,000 won in a total of the market price and the dricker. The Defendant opened the door of the above taxi to take cash out, but did not bring about an attempted attempt due to the lack of cash.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E prosecutorial statement;

1. Each statement prepared by L, H and J;

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Criminal history records, reply reports by individuals, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the current status of personal identification and confinement;