When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in sales of precious metals with the trade name of “C” in Ansan-gu Mayang-si B.

At around 11:00 on March 13, 2017, the Defendant purchased five gold Bans, which are owned by the victim E, acquired from D as stolen goods from the room.

In such cases, the defendant, who is engaged in sales of precious metals, has a duty of care to verify whether he/she is stolen by ascertaining his/her personal information, etc., while checking the details of the acquisition of the gold bullion, the motive for the sale, and the price at the market price of the gold bullion.

Nevertheless, the Defendant acquired the stolen in 524,000 won by purchasing five gold bars from 524,000 by negligence, even though he neglected the above care and neglecting the judgment on the stolen water.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of a suspect of F, G, H, or D;

1. Statement made by the police against E (simplified theft);

1. Investigation report (Analysis of CCTV images installed in I and confirmation of the scene of crime);

1. On-site photographs and CCTV photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on lists of damaged articles;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 364 and 362 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for a crime;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The grounds for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the Provisional Payment Order are primary offenders. The punishment shall be determined as set forth in the order, taking into consideration the following: (a) the Defendant’s neglect of duty of care; (b) the extent that the Defendant neglected to perform his duty of care; (c) the amount of purchased precious metals; and (d) equity among the owners of the business who were investigated.