절도
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The summary of the facts charged was cut off by the Defendant around 15:05 on May 3, 2017, and around 301 DNA telecom 301 in Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu (hereinafter “the instant telecom”), and the victim E, under the influence of alcohol, was cut off four casino chips (one chips equivalent to KRW 1,00,000, an amount of KRW 1,000,000), each of which was on the inside the mouth where the victim was deprived of the victim’s chips (three chips equivalent to KRW 1,00,000). The summary of the Defendant and the Defendant’s defense counsel’s assertion is not a theft of casino chips from any damage on the part of the Defendant, as described in the facts charged.
3. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, the victim's economic situation (the victim stated at the investigative agency that "work at the Chinese house and received KRW 720,000 won on the day of this case" and the victim's friendship relationship between the defendant and the victim (the victim stated in this court that "the victim's relationship with the defendant is not close to this court, but is known to the defendant's conduct," and the victim's friendship relationship (the victim stated that "the victim's relationship with the defendant is not so close as to the defendant's friendship," it seems difficult for the victim to easily lend the casino chips up to KRW 1.3 million to the defendant. In light of the fact that the victim did not lend the casino chips to the defendant from the investigative agency to this court, and the victim stated that the defendant was voluntarily brought about, it is doubtful that the defendant's casino chips as stated in the facts charged are stolen.
However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone that the defendant stolen the casino chips owned by the victim, as stated in the facts charged, was proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt by the judge.
It is insufficient to view it, and otherwise,.