Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, each of the above defendants is against the defendants for a period of one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The defendants are between the hermenity and the hermenity.

On January 28, 2017, the Defendants: (a) moved to the back of the F taxi in the operation of the victim E in the vicinity of the city of Ansan-si, a member of the Gu of Ansan-si; (b) Defendant A, by using the gaps in which the victim gets on the front side and drive while moving to the back of the F taxi in the operation of the victim E; (c) Defendant A, who was suffering from the driver’s seat, walked with a test color equivalent to approximately KRW 320,000 of the market price owned by the victim, in his/her possession at hand, and frank back to Defendant B, who was next to the driver’s seat as soon as possible; and (d) Defendant B again had it at the seat of Defendant C; and (e) Defendant C arrived at the vicinity of the State located in the Gu of Ansan-si, a member of the Gu of Ansan-si, a member of the Gu of Ansan-si.

As a result, the Defendants committed a theft of the amount of 320,000 won at the market price owned by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. E statements;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

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

1. Reduction of a small amount under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution is that the victim was aware of the theft of his cow during two hours after the crime of the instant case, and the victim was sent to the police box. At that place, the victim confirmed the Defendants’ crime through the black stuff image installed in the taxi.

The police confirmed CCTV around the lower place of the Defendants and tried to find out whether the Defendants were driven by the Defendants, and successfully identified the Defendants.

The CCTV screen is admitted as evidence, and even if the Defendants did not take any measure while leaving the damaged goods in the dormitory of Defendant A until the police is requested to summon the Defendants, Defendant A is not stolen since the police did not take any measure.

Defendant 1 stated “.......”