A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[Judgment of the court below] On August 21, 2013, the defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for larceny and attempted larceny, and one year of suspended execution and became final and conclusive on August 29, 2013.

【Criminal Facts】

On May 24, 2013, at around 06:45, the Defendant came to the “D Frequency” of the Victim C’s Operation in Jeju City, and then, the Defendant is a small-scale one week in which the Defendant was in a cooling house, following a restaurant back to the back.

The amount equivalent to 3,00 won of a disease or market price was cut off and stolen.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement prepared in C and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to field photographs and investigation reports (calculated amount of damage);

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime: Article 329 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Handling concurrent crimes: The latter part of Articles 37 and 39 (1) of the Criminal Act (the crime committed on the market is concurrent crimes with larceny, etc. in a judgment that became final and conclusive);

1. Suspension of execution: Non-application of the sentencing guidelines to the sentence as stated in the order, considering all the following circumstances as the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the sentencing conditions specified in Article 51 of the Criminal Act as stated in the reasons for sentencing below): The circumstances favorable: recognition of the facts of crime and reflects the amount of damage, the amount of damage is minor, and the existence and proof of the alcohol of the defendant seems to have affected the crime; circumstances that are disadvantageous to the fact that there are no previous criminal records other than the judgment and there is no record of criminal punishment after 1994: It is not good to judge at the same time that the crime is committed in light of the Act on the Punishment of Crimes (the act of entering a building after destroying a glass window) and equality: The criminal facts, such as larceny, etc. (the act of larceny, entering a warehouse over 36 times), the normal relation (a small amount of damage), the ordinary criminal facts of this case, and all other criminal facts of this case.