절도등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant, by obtaining the victim’s permission, entered a low-level warehouse, did not constitute a crime of intrusion on a structure, and only went to a low-level warehouse with ten deaths and tens. Thus, theft is not established.
B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the intrusion of a structure, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant entered a low temperature warehouse of the victim without the victim's consent as stated in the above part of the facts charged. Thus, the above part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.
B. As to larceny, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the above part of the charges: “The Defendant: (a) committed a theft by taking advantage of the gap in the market price of the victim’s possession of the victim-owned store located in Chungcheongbuk-gun C on November 20, 2010, in which the said victim was hospitalized in a hospital due to the hives drive, etc.; (b) thereby neglecting management; (c) 2.2 million won; (d) 44 gamblings; and (e) 3.20,000 won in the market price of the victim-owned store located in Chungcheongbuk-gun C; and (e) committed a theft by taking advantage of the gap in management due to the hives drive, etc.; and (d) the evidence admitted by the lower court as evidence of guilt entered the Defendant’s partial statement in the third public trial protocol and the police’s statement in D.
2) First, the part of the Defendant’s statement in the trial protocol No. 3 of the lower court’s trial is not worth as evidence to acknowledge the facts charged, since the Defendant had 10 yarns in low temperature warehouses with the victim’s permission.
3) Next, a protocol in which the full text or the full text statement was recorded is inadmissible in principle in accordance with the provisions of Article 310-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, the full text statement is death, illness, overseas residence and other matters of the original statement in accordance with the provisions of Article 316(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.