A. On April 25, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 22:00 on April 25, 2017, at the general restaurant located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “D”, the Defendant: (b) stated that the victim E, who was a customer, was 60,000 won in cash, hered on the floor; (c) one resident registration certificate; (d) one driver’s license; and (e) four credit cards, was discovered by the other customer F; and (b) notified the Defendant to the Defendant as if the Defendant was her seat. The lower court determined the lower court.

He kept the wall of this case but lost it after being kept.

The testimony was made to the effect that it was "."

On the other hand, the witness H showed that he had the instant land A on the following day of this case in this Court, and that G was whether he would collapse.

It stated that it will bring to the police as it is not a matter of course.

The testimony was made to the effect that it was "."

Considering the above circumstances, it cannot be said that there is no credibility of the witness G’s testimony.

② At the time of the instant case, the Defendant appears to have diminished the decentralization of alcohol.

In other words, G is considered to have been unsatised by many defendants in the police.

“The statement was made”.

Witness

H d In this Court, “At the time, they have drank many times by mixing with beer and beer.”

“The statement was made.”

The Defendant, under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case, brought the instant land A to her own or her own behaviors, and changed. The Defendant did not have any criminal record, and the Defendant did not have any evidence of using cash, credit cards, etc. on the instant land A, in consideration of the circumstances.