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

The defendant is the apartment security guard of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, who is between D and D.

On March 22, 2015, at around 06:44, the Defendant: (a) removed from the warehouse of the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “C Apartment” products, and (b) removed from D (59 years of age; (c) thereby, the Defendant committed a theft by carrying recycled products (such as wind, chairs, etc.) of a value equivalent to KRW 100,000,000, in the market value of the victim’s name unclaimed box owned, into a vehicle with a number of

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement made by witnesses D in the third protocol of the trial;

1. Investigation report (with respect to submission of photographs), investigation report (with respect to recyclables taken out);

1. Application of CCTV Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument ① The Defendant left the vehicle with recycled products, but obtained prior approval from E, the chief of the management department of the recycling and collection company.

② The damaged thing of this case is not an object of larceny as an unclaimed thing.

(3) The defendant's act is justified as a justifiable act that does not violate the social rules and is recycled of abandoned articles.

2. Determination

A. The submission of evidentiary documents with prior approval (the 42 pages of investigation records) alone is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. On the other hand, according to the witness E’s legal statement, the defendant is only recognized as having not obtained prior approval from E at the time.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence as indicated in the judgment as to whether the goods were non-owned, the following circumstances, i.e., ① the C Apartments collected goods from the occupants, etc., stored them in the warehouse of recycled goods, and the recycling collection company collected them at a level of KRW 300,000 per month. The instant damaged goods are also stored in the warehouse of recycled goods for such reasons.