A shall be punished by imprisonment for six months, by a fine of 70,000 won.

Defendant

B The above fine shall not be paid.

1. Defendant A

A. The Defendant, around September 2017, embezzled of occupied separated objects, brought about one cell phone (number G) in the gallon of Samsung G, which is equivalent to KRW 200,000,000 in the market value of the victim F, in the vicinity of the second basement “E” located in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property that has been separated from the possession of the victim.

B. From October 2017 to 00:00 to 03:00, the Defendant: (a) intruded into the “J” construction site managed by the victim I located in the Gwanak-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and stolen the victim’s construction materials owned by the victim-owned construction materials worth KRW 45,000 and kept at the site through the entrance; and (b) stolen the victim-owned construction materials owned by the victim-owned by the victim I.

Accordingly, the Defendant, at night, stolen the victim’s property by intrusion on a structure managed by another person and then stolen the victim’s property from around that time to around January 25, 2018 or from around 26 to around January 25, 2018, by the following methods: (a) in the foregoing manner, the Defendant stolen the victim’s property owned by the victims worth KRW 1,725,000 in total over ten times.

2. On December 2, 2017, at around 08:00, Defendant B purchased 1 strings and 1 strings owned by the victim who stolen and stolen from the iron point of “L” operated by the Defendant on K and 1st floor in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwanak-gu.

In such cases, the defendant, who is engaged in the steel store duty, has a duty of care to verify whether or not the defendant is stolen by taking into account the following: (a) the process and motive of acquiring the cargo pumps of construction materials; (b) the sale motive; and (c) the price at which the transaction price is appropriate.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by negligence, believed that it remains at a construction site while neglecting the statement of A, acquired a total of KRW 40,000 by negligence in the course of business from around that time to January 26, 2018, as shown above, the Defendant acquired the stolen goods by negligence in the course of business eight times, i.e., the list of crimes in attached Form (2) from around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. M, N,O, P, I.