A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 8, 2015, the Defendant: (a) at the construction site of a new factory located in Ssung City B on April 20, 2015; (b) loaded and stolen Chapter 2,100,000, a total of the market prices managed by the Victim C on the cargo loaded in D Poter.

In addition, from around that time to June 1, 2015, the Defendant stolen the property owned by others seven times in total, such as the list of crimes in attached Form.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement;

1. Each report on the occurrence of each case and each investigation report;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act is [the scope of recommending punishment] the sentencing range under Article 62 (1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution of Sentence I (the range of recommending punishment] : the theft in general property / [the scope of recommending punishment / [the scope of recommending punishment] living types / life types / the special mitigation area / the special mitigation area (one to six months), the theft in general property / [the range of recommending punishment / the range of recommending punishment ] the special mitigation area (one to six months), the special mitigation area (one to six months) of punishment / the special mitigation area (one to six months) / the life types / the final mitigation scope of punishment due to the aggravation of a majority who is not punishable: The decision on the punishment of the defendant several times in November or November 1; the fact that the defendant has received the same kind of damage from the defendant as the victim's personal records and economic conditions at the time of committing the crime in this case; the fact that the defendant has reached economic difficulty in sentencing and the amount of punishment as the victim's present circumstances.