A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal record] On May 1, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. at the Busan District Court on January 5, 2015, and completed the execution of the sentence at the Busan Detention Center.

[2] On October 5, 2015, at around 22:15, the Defendant: (a) stolen the victim’s crepan in front of the Busan East-dong Busan-dong Busan-dong Busan-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si (hereinafter “the victim’s crepan”), with 70,000 won or more of the market

Summary of Evidence

1. Each police statement made with respect to C and D;

1. Seizure records;

1. A criminal investigation report (at the time of dispatch);

1. A report on investigation;

1. Investigation report (Attachment, etc. of CCTV images at E convenience stores);

1. A report on investigation (as to the statement of a wooden person);

1. A report on investigation (to hear statements by shots);

1. Investigation report (to be accompanied by video data to be submitted by a wooden person);

1. Previous convictions: The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries about criminal history and investigation reports (Attachment of data on the current status of personal identification and confinement);

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense. Article 329 (Selection of Punishment of Imprisonment)

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 35 of the Aggravation of Cumulative Offense Criminal Act is denied the charges to the effect that the Defendant committed the instant case while drinking alcohol on the date stated in the facts charged, and drinking alcohol on the part of the victim, and drinking alcohol on the part of the victim, and drinking alcohol on the part of the victim, the injured party went beyond the bench and was about to do so, while the victim was about to do so.

However, the author argues that ① the Defendant, who was listed in the victim’s body and then deducted the victim’s main body, and met it, and that the Defendant continued to have taken the video images to commit the crime, ② the statement made by the shot D’s investigative agency is very detailed, detailed, and detailed facts; ③ the video submitted by the shot D is confirmed.