A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On January 1, 201, from around February 19, 201 to around February 19, 2011, the Defendant intruded against the will of the victim E who manages the apartment construction site in Ansan-si from the construction site of Ansan-si, and stolen the victim F, who was installed at that site, by removing the mphere of the mphere, owned by the victim F.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness G, E, and F;

1. The protocol of interrogation of each police officer in relation to G and E;

1. Each police statement made to F and E;

1. A copy of the certificate of measurement and a copy of the certificate;

1. Investigation report (shot photographs of the scene where damaged articles are installed prior to the occurrence of the case);

1. Investigation report (related to the statement of security guards at the scene of occurrence and the owner of secondhand business);

1. A copy of a contract or a copy of data on financial transactions;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (to hear statements from witnesses E);

1. Relevant Article 319 of the Criminal Act, Article 319 of the Criminal Act (1) (influence of buildings), Article 329 of the Criminal Act (influence of intention) and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act for the aggravation of concurrent crimes

1. The summary of the assertion was that the Defendant collected pit pumps from the construction site of Andong-si D apartment at the time, but at the time, the Defendant was permitted to remove and remove the scrap pumps from the victim F, and prepared a contract for succession of the obligation with H and the holder of the right of retention at the construction site and collected the pit pumps by entering the construction site with the H’s permission to manage the said construction site. Thus, there was no unauthorized intrusion on the structure and there was no fact that the victim F’s property was stolen.

2. The following circumstances found based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, i.e., management of the D apartment construction site:

E consistently in investigative agencies and this Court, “Around January 201, 201, the Defendant is present at the present location.”