Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

At around 02:30 on August 16, 2015, the Defendants discovered that the victim G is under the influence of alcohol in front of the bus stops located in Dobong-gu Seoul, Dobong-gu, Seoul, while getting on and off D Obaba, Defendant B was under the influence of alcohol; Defendant B reported the network; Defendant A 6,000 won in cash owned by the victim; Defendant A turned out one card with a resident registration certificate; and Defendant A turned out one lock in the market price.

As a result, the defendants stolen the victim's property together.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. G statements;

1. Application of police seizure records, photographs of seized articles, theft photographs, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. [the scope of recommending punishment] The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. [the scope of recommending punishment] of the Act on Special Mitigation (3 to 1 year), [Special Mitigation] of the Act on Larceny for General Property, and the crime of this case which is a living-type crime and a crime not subject to punishment [the decision of sentence] of this case. The crime of this case is not that the defendants, who are under juvenile protective disposition two times for the same kind of crime, committed the theft of

However, in light of the circumstances, the Defendants led to their confessions and reflects on their criminal acts, and the Defendants stated that they reached the crime of this case at the age of 19 years old, and that the damaged goods were temporarily returned and the victims agreed with the Defendants and were not subject to punishment. Defendant A’s family members are leading the above Defendant to the above Defendant, the sentence of suspended execution, such as the order, shall be imposed only once in consideration of the circumstances, and the prevention of recidivism and sound rehabilitation to society.