A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 27, 2018, the Defendant intruded on his structure and stolen, on May 27, 2018, came to an E church managed by the victim D in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul around 09:02, and entered arbitrarily the office of the second floor of the church through open doors in order to steals the object, and then came to go to back with the victim’s cash amounting to KRW 100,000, the victim’s possession on his/her book, and the amounting to KRW 150,000,000, the market price of which is 150,000,000.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd on a structure managed by the victim, and stolen the victim's property.

2. On June 2, 2018, the Defendant intruded into a structure and stolen structure of the victim G in F at around 12:00 on June 2, 2018, and entered the H church managed by the victim G in F at around 12:0 on June 2, 2018, with an open door in order to steals the object, and carried 8,000 won in cash, which is the victim’s possession on the upper floor of the church, and 50,000 won in market value, which is contained by the head of the new bank credit card company.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd on a structure managed by the victim, and stolen the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the draft D;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act (Influence of buildings), Article 329 of the Criminal Act (influence of buildings), and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor, respectively;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Code aggravated concurrent crimes: A favorable circumstance in which the defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had a number of criminal records of the same kind of crime: the defendant recognized and reflected each of the instant crimes; the defendant committed the instant crime for the purpose of resolving the board and lodging of the defendant; and the victim D and G did not want to be punished against the defendant by agreement with the victims with the defendant's father's efforts.