A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. A thief: (a) around December 1, 2014, the Defendant stolen the victim’s “Emart” in the “Emart” of the Plaintiff’s D Operation, Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, Seoul, by taking advantage of the gaps in which the victim’s surveillance was neglected, by taking advantage of the gap in the victim’s surveillance at the display stand, by taking a 2,000 won of the market price.

2. At around 23:00 on December 1, 2014, the Defendant: (a) heard the victim’s warning that he would pay an excessive value from the victim G, a police officer belonging to the Hanmi Police Station F District of the Kumi Police Station, which received 112 a report; and (b) there is no money to the above victim’s statement that “I would be able to give and drink the money; (c) there is the same son’s son; (d) there is son’s bitch, son’s bitch, and son’s bitch; and (d) there is a bitch, son’s bitch, and son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The statement of G police officer;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 329 of the relevant Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act requires a strict punishment in that the defendant assaultss the police officer in uniform to obstruct his/her legitimate performance of official duties, but the defendant is against his/her mistake, the defendant agrees with the thief victim, and the defendant is suspended of execution.