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

On October 7, 2015, at around 07:30 on October 7, 2015, the Defendant, at the C tea located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, did not take necessary procedures, such as acquiring 499,000 won of dust or cell phone at the market price, which the Defendant was operated by the victim E, and returning it to the victim.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of statutes on records of seizure and lists of seizure;

1. Relevant Article 360 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 360 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. A person who has found a lost article for reasons of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act in the order of provisional payment shall promptly return it to the person who has lost it, the owner, or other persons who have the right to claim the restoration of the article (Article 1(1) of the Lost article Act) or submit it to the police station, etc. Meanwhile, a person who has found a ship, a vehicle, a building, or any other other thing of another person within a district in which the passage of the general public is prohibited shall hand over it to the manager (Article 10(1) of the Lost Articles Act), and a taxi driver is the manager of the vehicle under the aforementioned Lost Articles Act.

In light of the characteristics of the taxi means of transport, taxi drivers and small number of passengers are also in a narrow space where they are isolated. As such, it is only applicable to the manager of a vehicle under the Lost Articles Act, and even if the taxi driver who has formed a certain degree of relationship with the passengers, embezzled the goods left by the passengers as they are, and the case where a third person is discovered and embezzled the goods left on the road in which it is merely the case where a third person is discovered and embezzled, it cannot be said that it is the same in the possibility of social criticism.

The following circumstances include the defendant's age, sex, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and after the crime.