Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one million won shall be the one day.

On September 19, 2018, around 19:38, the Defendant: (a) divided into conversations between the victim E (years 54) who provided D recruitment advertisements into a newspaper in front of “C convenience store” located in Seopo-si B, Seopo-si B; (b) then, the victim left the scene where he left the scene where he would contact later; and (c) reported the cash 250,000 won, which the victim harming the floor, and the wall that contains three credit card pages.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant prepared by the police;

1. Statement of statement E prepared by the police officer;

1. To enter into investigation reports on police preparation and telephone communications;

1. Report on internal investigation (including the specific circumstances of the suspect) and recording and video (including attached documents) of police preparation;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the video accused and defense counsel of CCTV at a convenience store A thief

1. The gist of the claim is to find a wall that is far away from the front of the convenience point and put it into the mail box in order to return the wall to the main body, and open the wall to the post office room, and to confirm that only several copies of the card are included therein, and the wall was put into the mail box.

Therefore, the Defendant did not commit theft of a victim’s wall with 250,000 won in cash and 3 credit cards.

2. The term “afforestation” under the Criminal Act and the term “afforestation” means the removal from possession by a person other than himself/herself from possession against his/her will to his/her own or a third party’s possession.

In addition, "the intention of unlawful acquisition", which is necessary for the establishment of larceny, refers to the intention of excluding the right holder of another person's property and disposing of it in accordance with the economic usage, such as his own property, and it does not merely infringe on the possession of another person, and thus, it does not constitute larceny. However, the intention of infringing on the ownership of property or other equivalent right.