In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, each of them is 100.

1. Defendant A around 09:00 on August 26, 2017, at the top of the D convenience store located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Defendant A, who was aware of its reputation.

E with knowledge of the fact that the market value of 800,000 won or more of the victim F, who embezzled his or her possession, is 5,000 won or more of the gallon, and that the victim H’s market value is 800,000 won or more of the 6,000,000 won or more of the victim H’s market value, he or she acquired the stolen goods.

2. Defendant B, on August 27, 2017, was aware of his knowledge in the K cafeteria located in the JJ of Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si on August 14:00.

A received a request for the sale of a lost Handphone from A, and acquired stolen goods with knowledge of the fact that the market value of the victim F is equivalent to 800,000 won per gallon 5 (maei: G) and the market value of the victim H is equivalent to 800,000 won per gallon 1 (maei: I).

Summary of Evidence

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of the Defendants and E by the prosecution;

1. Application of respective Acts and subordinate statutes of H and F;

1. Defendants of the relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Article 362(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial concurrent defendants: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants who choose punishment: Fine.

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act