A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 15, 2017, the Defendant, at around 01:00, found one cellphone in the Nowon-dong, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, Seocheon-dong, Nowon-gu, 30-16, the market value of the victim C lost in the above park, which the victim C lost.

Defendant 1 did not take necessary procedures such as returning the above acquired property to the victim and embezzled the property as he had on his own mind.

2. On June 17, 2017, around 04:00, the Defendant: (a) committed theft in front of the “New Bank Seodaemun-gu Points” located in Seodaemun-gu No. 1 Station in Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 2017; (b) the victim D was under the influence of alcohol; and (c) the victim’s market price located adjacent to the victim was 200,000 won by holding one copy of the document of “EE” equivalent to 200,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Investigation report (to make a statement by phone of a witness E), investigation report (to have a mobile phone victim C telephone conversations), investigation report (to have a victim D telephone call);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs, thief products, and photographs damaged by embezzlement of possession.

1. Article 360(1) (a) and Article 329 (a) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime in question;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. In light of the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes (within the scope of the total of the long-term punishments of two crimes), the punishment for each of the crimes of this case is unlimited, and the defendant did not receive a letter from the victims, etc., the punishment for the crime of this case is imposed. However, in light of the fact that the defendant reflects his/her mistake, the damage was returned to the victims, and there was no history of punishment exceeding the fine, and other factors of sentencing indicated in the records, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, etc.