Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

around 14:10 on May 12, 2014, the Defendant had a ping residence house in the H Hospital outside and main facts located in G in Sinsan-si.

At the same bottled room, the victim I was sleeped to be invertebrate in order to be faced with inverte injection. In the process, the victim slicked the bed down and the bed down to the bed below the bed.

The victim knew on the floor of the wall, but he was unable to move because he was faced with vertebrate injection, so he thought that he could not put the wall on the wall, and that he did not put the wall on the wall, and that he would not put the wall on the wall.

At this time, the defendant reported that the victim's wall bed away from the floor, and even if he did not meet the reflect of the string house at the time, the string house that was faced by the nurse was cut down rapidly. The defendant stolen one male wall perfore with the market price equivalent to KRW 20,000, one resident registration certificate, one resident registration certificate, and one driver's license, using a gap in which the victim cannot see the victim's bed against the string, and the victim's 20,000,000,000 won in cash owned by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of a witness I;

1. Investigation report (explosion and investigation between hospitals) and investigation report (in relation to the details of the withdrawal of the driver's license of a subordinate post office, hearing the statements of the registrant of the article found);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to copies of letters of post office acquisition;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that there was no intention of larceny since the defendant was aware of the principal's wallper at the time of the instant case and brought about the wallpers as indicated in the judgment on the victim's possession (hereinafter "the wallpers of this case").

Domins, Domins, .