A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On June 30, 2016, at the E gas station operated by the victim D located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the Defendant: (a) 03:58 on June 30, 2016; (b) taken off from the E gas station of F, an employee.

(2) The sum of 300,300 won in cash, including 14,5,00 won in cash, 7, 1,000 won in cash, 60 won in total, and 65,300 won in 14,5,000 won in cash, owned by the victim at a credit cooperative on its books, after opening an office entrance and intrusion into the office by using the keys of the above gas station office.

L. A. L. theft was committed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements prepared in D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs by cutting down the 112 reported case processing table, on-site photographs, and CCTV images of a gas station;

1. Article 330 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including observation of protection and community service order;

1. Where the application of the sentencing guidelines [determination of types] thief, theft against general property, theft against general property (person in special sentencing] thief, and intrusion against places, other than indoor residential spaces (the scope of the recommended punishment] / From 4 months to 1 year and 6 months (in cases falling under the mitigation area, only two special mitigation persons exist and the minimum sentencing range of the recommended punishment shall be mitigated by 1/2);

2. Consideration, such as the fact that there was a history of having been sentenced to juvenile protective disposition by sentence or several times for the same crime as the sentence is rendered, the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime in this case, the fact that the defendant agreed with the victim, and the amount of