Part concerning Defendant B and C shall be reversed.

Defendant

B and C shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and six months.

Defendant

Although Defendant C obtained knowledge of the fact that the cell phone recorded in the original trial was stolen at the time of the original trial, the lower court found Defendant C guilty of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and the lower court’s sentence (two years of imprisonment) imposed on Defendant C is unreasonable.

Defendant

B The imprisonment (two years of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court on Defendant B is unreasonable.

Judgment

Defendant

C The perception of stolen goods in the crime of arranging or acquiring stolen goods is not required to be a conclusive recognition, and it is also sufficient as a dolusent recognition to the extent of doubt that the stolen goods are ambiguous, and the issue of whether the stolen goods have been aware of the fact shall be determined by taking into account the identity of the possessor of the stolen goods, the nature of the stolen goods, the transaction cost, and other circumstances.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Do5904 Decided December 9, 2004, and Supreme Court Decision 2009Do3552 Decided May 13, 201). In the instant case, Defendant C did not take such measures despite the fact that it was possible to verify whether it is a normal mobile phone by inputting the device chain of a used mobile phone traded. Defendant C purchased by Defendant C included an up-to-date mobile phone for six months after the launch of a used mobile phone, and such latest mobile phone was difficult to purchase in a general distribution channel, and it was difficult to purchase the mobile phone at a price lower than the normal market price due to the absence of ordinary parts (e.g., packaging, distribution, and use specifications). Defendant C was aware that the mobile phone transaction with Defendant C was not a normally traded mobile phone from an investigative agency. Defendant C also stated that it did not export the mobile phone in a normal way.