Defendant

A Imprisonment for one year, and each of the defendants B and C shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months.

However, this decision is delivered to the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is an article of E affiliated with a victim company which produces cremation and cosmetic, and Defendant B is an article of F affiliated with the delivery of goods at the D Cheongju factory, and Defendant C previously kept the goods of D Cheongju factory.

A tent manager is a tent warehouse manager.

Defendant

A agreed to Defendant B’s words “the victim Company’s cremation and cosmetic, and the Defendant B consented to it.” Defendant B made a statement to the same purport with Defendant C, and Defendant C also consented to it. On January 2018, the Defendants agreed to steals the victim Company’s cremation and cosmetic in order.

On January 1, 2018, the Defendants: (a) around 14:00, around 14:00, in the store for Cheongju Factory Goods Distribution in Seo-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-si; (b) Defendant A, for whom 18-lane 18 minutes off, loaded the cremation and cosmetic in Defendant B’s H cargo vehicle; and (c) Defendant B, for which Defendant B, brought this to Defendant B’s warehouse in the south-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, the territory of the victim was 30,170,000 won in total, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table of crimes, and brought up three times in total the opposite 54 cargo box, such as cremation paper and cosmetic. (d) Defendant B brought about the opposite 91 box of the victim’s market price owned by Defendant C.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly stolen the property of the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made by the police to J;

1. Application of statutes governing the difference in inventory inspection on April 14, 2018;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the Defendants’ choice of punishment for the crime: Articles 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B and C: Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of suspended execution: The conditions unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act are not sufficient in light of the method of crime and the amount of damage, etc., and Defendant A has the same criminal records.