Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for eight 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

Defendant

B On June 24, 2016, the Daegu District Court was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a year due to a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Doing Vehicles) in the Seo-gu District Court's branch branch, and the said judgment was finalized on July 2, 2016.

Defendants work together as employees of the lending company, and Defendant B is a person who has worked in the smartphone agency for the operation of the victim D.

On June 20, 2016, at around 07:00, the Defendants came to the “F” agency of the victim’s operation in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Chungcheongnam-si, and went to the agency with a pre-determined net value, etc., and intruded with the said agency, the Defendants carried 19 smartphones in the aggregate amounting to 15,803,70 won of the market value of the victim’s ownership displayed at the display site.

Accordingly, the Defendants committed a theft of the property owned by the victim jointly.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Police seizure records;

1. As to the investigation report (as to attachment of field photographs)

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Investigation reports (reports on attachment of separate judgments against suspects B), amounts not to be disposed of, and reporting results of confirmation of facts and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendant B who handles concurrent crimes: The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants subject to discretionary mitigation: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. The Defendants: The reasons for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment] for general property in cases where they intrude into places other than indoor residential space (the person subject to special mitigation) (the person subject to special mitigation) (the person subject to special mitigation) and the person not subject to punishment (the person subject to special mitigation) (the person subject to special mitigation), and the case where the Defendants jointly intruded on the victim's stores with knife, etc. and stolen property, and thus, commit a crime in light of the relevant criminal law. However, the victim is not the victim.