When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a person who works as an employee at a mobile phone sales agency in Daejeon U.S., and E is a person who professionally purchases a heavy mobile phone.

On September 8, 2013, the Defendant received from F on September 10, 2013, a request from F to sell one of the ggal lusium 3 mobile phones equivalent to KRW 800,000,00 in the market value of the victim G owned by F.

The defendant knew of the fact that the above mobile phone is a stolen, the defendant had known of the fact that the mobile phone was a stolen, and had a heavy mobile phone to E, which is a purchaser of the mobile phone.

Therefore, around 14:00 on the same day, F received 150,000 won from E and sold the above mobile phone, and the Defendant received 20,000 won from E as good offices fees.

Accordingly, the defendant assisted the transfer of stolen goods.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the witness F’s statutory statement Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 362 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 362 (2) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the defendant does not have the same criminal record, confession and reflect in depth.

In addition, there was no substantial profit from crimes, and there was an agreement with the victim.

In this context, the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime are considered, the punishment as ordered shall be determined.