Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, as to the Defendants for two years from the date of the final judgment of this case, the Defendants are above.

Punishment of the crime

around 03:00 on September 10, 2012, the Defendants, along with D and E, reached the Hridge managed by the victim G in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

D due to the decline attached to the nearby wife, the above HG glass window was broken, and the victim was placed on the books of the office, with one Nowon-gu, Kamerra, 40,000 won and 40,000 won in cash on the market value, which is the victim's possession on the books of the office, and the Defendants, along with E, committed a network before the entrance.

Accordingly, the Defendants stolen the victim's property jointly with D and E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police interrogation protocol of the Defendants, D, and E

1. A written statement of the G production;

1. A written request for appraisal;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

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

1. Mitigation of juveniles (Defendant B) Articles 2 and 60 (2) of the Juvenile Act, Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Discretionary mitigation (Defendant A) Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution (Provided, That the defendant B added Article 60(3) of the Juvenile Act) provides that the defendants are erroneous and repented, and there are several records of juvenile protective disposition; however, there are no records of criminal punishment yet; the amount of damage and the degree of participation in the punishment of the defendants is relatively minor; the defendants' character, character, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; the circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered as a whole, and the punishment is determined as ordered.