점유이탈물횡령
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. Around 14:21 on April 20, 2014, the Defendant, at the same time, embezzled occupied objects with the intent of acquisition with the above stripping with the intent of acquisition without taking necessary procedures, such as acquiring a bank (hereinafter “the bank in this case”), where the victim E (here, 44) was lost, from the front bus stops located in Ansan-si C, and reporting to the near police station, etc. (hereinafter “the bank in this case”).
2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court on the existence of the defendant's intent to illegally obtain the above assertion: (i) the defendant acquired the instant bank and brought it to the victim's shop he had worked, although he could have been able to keep it in custody after leaving his workplace, (ii) the defendant consistently obtained the instant bank from the investigative agency to the court, and then failed to report on the fact of acquiring the said bank's house at once to undergo education; (iii) there is no objective material to reject the above assertion; (iv) there was a statement that the defendant prepared and submitted to this court a statement that the defendant would inform the defendant that he had been in custody of the instant bank; and (iv) the defendant used the road in this case.
In full view of all of the facts that there is no evidence to prove that the defendant intended to dispose of or dispose of, it is insufficient to recognize the defendant's intent to acquire the instant bank located in the bus stop and did not report it to the police station, etc. for about 54 hours. There is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, they are acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325.