Seized evidence shall be forfeited from the defendant.

1. On November 10, 2017, the Defendant: (a) purchased 380,000 won and acquired stolen goods in front of the exit of subway No. 2 located in the subway No. 83 5-ro, Jung-gu, Seoul, Seoul, from around November 10, 2017, the Defendant: (b) purchased 380,000 won and acquired stolen goods from the victim D, knowing that he/she had stolen 7 smartphones from C.

2. On November 13, 2017, the Defendant purchased 110,000 won and acquired stolen goods in the same place as the above 1.08:00 around November 13, 2017, with knowledge of the fact that the instant smartphones owned by the victim E, which he stolen from C, are stolen.

3. On February 4, 2018, around 14:00 on February 4, 2018, the Defendant purchased a 7 smartphone from a person who was aware of his/her name he/she was stolen from a person who was unable to know the name he/she became aware of in the new central market located in the Shindong in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, and from a person who was unable to know his/her name through C, for the victim’s 7 smartphone, for the victim’s 480,00,000, for the 7 smartphone in the galth ju, for the galth ju, for the victim’s identity, for the victim’s 110,000,000, for the 7 smartphone in the galth ju, for the galth ju, for the victim’s 7 smartphone, for the 7 smartphone in the gallon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the prosecution against C;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Each written statement of E and G;

1. Application of the police seizure protocol and the statutes on the list of seizure;

1. Relevant Article 362 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 362 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. As a result of the crime of acquiring the same head of the same chapter for the reason of sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act, a person again repeats the same kind of crime in August 2014, even though he/she had been punished for two years of suspended sentence, and is given opportunity in light of the frequency and date of the crime, and the crime of acquiring the head of this case is a larceny or possession of a mobile phone.