beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.05.26 2015노6993

절도

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) at the time of theft of the victim's reproduction automobiles owned by the victim victim D, the fact that the defendant was in the vicinity of the crime place was confirmed by F's statement, etc.; (b) the criminal's flight route and flight time is similar to the defendant's moving route and movement time; and (c) the defendant's arrival status and the situation of the defendant's arrival are the same as the one of the test color system on white half, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of the crime of this case.

2. Determination

A. On September 27, 2014, at around 01:20 on September 27, 2014, the Defendant: (a) set the victim D’s unfolded vehicle in front of the 288 Han Bank with the right line effect; and (b) made a transaction at a cash payer at the time; and (c) stolen it by using a cresh without surrounding areas.

B. The lower court determined that the instant facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of criminal facts, in light of the following: (a) the lower court determined that each CCTV image submitted by the prosecutor was taken at the place where the said vehicle was stolen, based on the following: (b) it was difficult to readily conclude that a person who parked the said vehicle in the vicinity of the Defendant’s residence was the Defendant; and (c) the fingerprint was discovered in the driver’s seat knife of the said vehicle, not the fingerprints of the Defendant or the victim; and (b) it was insufficient to recognize the Defendant as a criminal who stolen the said vehicle, even if it was based on the F’s statement that the said CCTV image was hedging with the Defendant near the place where the said vehicle was stolen, on the ground that there was no proof of criminal facts.

(c)

1) Prosecutor ..