2. Defendant’s assertion and judgment

가. 피고인의 주장 요지 피고인은 공소사실 기재 일시, 장소에서 피해자의 손가방을 발견하고 이를 마트의 고객센터에 맡기려고 하였으나 이를 깜빡 잊고 그대로 가지고 간 것이고, 손가방을 마트에 돌려주기 위해 보관하고 있었을 뿐 절취할 의사는 없었다고

The argument is asserted.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant acknowledged the fact that the defendant had the victim's hand room without any measure although he was sufficiently able to report the loss to the Marart's account manager or the customer center. According to this fact, there is doubt as to whether the defendant's hand room is not with the intent to steal the above hand room.

However, in a criminal trial, the establishment of facts constituting a crime ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have the degree of confluence in a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not reach the degree of confluence, even if there are circumstances, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable, and the doubt of guilt should be determined based on the defendant’s benefit.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, namely, (i) if there was an intention to steal another person's goods, it is common to see the hand room by placing the hand room in his/her bags or clothes, and (ii) by promptly deviating from his/her place as soon as possible. According to CCTV photographs, the defendant did not see the above hand room by means such as inserting it in his/her bags.