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

1. On August 29, 2018, at around 21:30, the Defendant opened a blocking room and intruded by using the gap that the victim left, and the Defendant carried 7 drinking water in the amount of cash equivalent to KRW 2,000 and the market price of KRW 3,500, which is the victim’s possession, located in the string of the strings in the strings.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd a structure at night and stolen the victim's property.

2. On September 29, 2018, around 02:50 on September 29, 2018, the Defendant entered and intruded into the above top-down conference by making use of the gap in which the victim did not leave, and the Defendant 2 1,800 square meters of the market price in which the victim owned 200 square meters of 1,800 square meters of the victim’s market price, and carried 5,000 won of cash contained in the paper World Cup.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd a structure at night and stolen the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Some statements of the police interrogation protocol of the defendant;

1. Each statement of F and C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (as to the attachment of photographs of damaged goods), investigation report (as for the first investigation by the security guards of the H market), investigation report (CCTV Investigation-G), investigation report (as for the DNA CCTV suspect type and the current photographer of the suspect);

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendant asserts to the effect that the defendant was in a state of mental disability at the time of committing the instant crime due to mental illness.

In full view of various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s speech and behavior at the time of the instant crime, it cannot be seen that the Defendant did not have the weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the instant crimes, and thus, the above assertion is rejected.

The reason for sentencing is disadvantageous to the offender.