On February 4, 2017, at around 10:46, the Defendant stolen the Defendant with a white envelope containing KRW 6,000,000 in cash, which was kept in custody of the said telecomter.

2. Determination:

A. In the instant case, around 10:28 February 4, 2017, the victim laid away from the instant telecom, and around 10:46 on the same day, E (monmons), a staff member cleaning the telecom, had the victim and transferred the original earer to the Defendant who was in the telecomter. On February 5, 2017, F, a telecomter, was called from the victim, and was transferred to the Defendant until the Defendant confirmed the plan for the telecomer, he was transferred to the telecomer, and was confirmed by the CCTV of the said telecomer.

The reason why the defendant was identified as a criminal is that the CCTV image of the above Moel is correct as the result of the correction reading of CCTV images of the above Moel. The things in the inner machine is presumed to be a white bag.

It appears that it is due to “a form to confirm”.

B. As can be seen, even if the goods confirmed by the Defendant were presumed to be a white bag, the Defendant asserted that it was not an envelope, but a white paper folds, and that it was examined to identify the owner.

However, since the defendant's statement that did not properly examine the goods is somewhat lacking persuasive, there is a strong doubt that the defendant does not make a false statement in order to conceal the fact that he would bring an envelope.