On December 21, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 07:30 on December 21, 2015, the Defendant: (b) clean up the Plaintiff E and F’s delivery city in the Plaintiff’s home store at C University 1, A, Dong-dong, and (c) concealed under the cleaning card; and (c) cut down the amount equivalent to KRW 10,000 in total of two market prices owned by the victims, by means of hiding under the cleaning card.

A. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion found one of the cities neglected for a long time at the above door-to-door storage room and considered the upper limit thereof, and did not steals the above city.

B. According to the evidence adopted and examined by this court, at around 07:51 on December 18, 2015, the defendant confirmed that at around 07:51 on December 18, 2015, one of the delivery cities was kept in the storage room located in the above store, and that at around 07:03 on December 21, 2015, one of the delivery cities was kept in the above store after the lapse of approximately 07:03 on December 21, 2015, it was found that the above city city was kept in the storage room in the above store, and it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the above city was put in the neighboring garbage around 07:05 on the same day in the cleaning car, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone alone was insufficient to find that the defendant stolen the city as shown in the facts charged.

3. If so, the facts charged in the instant case constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting the crime, and thus, a not-guilty verdict is rendered after Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of this part of the judgment is to be publicly announced under Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.