2. Determination:

A. The Defendant, at the above date and time, was aware that he brought about the above wall, but there was no fact that he knew of the above wall that he purchased and brought about the above wall, and there was no difference between F, who is an employee, to pack the wall with a new product, and F, who was aware that F, with a guarantee certificate and a gambling certificate, has been received by himself, and that F, with the intention of illegal acquisition, did not commit the above wall, has consistently made statements from the investigative agency to this court.

B. Thus, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor should be recognized that the defendant had an intention to obtain unlawful acquisition, and there is only F's statement in the police as evidence corresponding thereto.

C. However, according to the records of this case, the following circumstances are recognized.

(1) The Defendant was preparing for marriage at the time of the instant case from the investigative agency to this court. The Defendant was a gift from the preliminary mother to the said branch, and was possessed with the same wallet as the above branch box. However, on the wind that was lost, the Defendant purchased the said wallet and then visited the said store at the time. On September 23, 2012, the Defendant visited the said store on September 23, 2012 with a female-friendly Gu H, a female-gu H, who was going to be married, and paid the price by presenting a “E” card with a credit card and H. The Defendant was visiting the said store, and was found to have been lost for a long time, and the said wallet was not required to be newly included. < Amended by Act No. 11408, Sep. 29, 2012>