Part concerning the second crime in the judgment shall be reversed.

For the crimes of No. 2, the defendant shall be punished.

A. misunderstanding of the legal doctrine (as to the crime No. 2 in its holding), this part of the crime is deemed to be “the Defendant, with the intention of transporting stolen goods, took a cell phone from a person designated by C Company related to C with the intention of transporting stolen goods to transport the Defendant’s house.” This constitutes a crime of storing stolen goods, not a crime of storing stolen goods but a crime of transporting stolen goods, and thus, the crime of transporting stolen goods has already

Even though the court below recognized this part of the facts charged as a stolen storage crime, and sentenced two punishments in the text after the judgment became final and conclusive, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Each sentence sentenced by the lower court (a crime of No. 1 in its holding: imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months, and a crime of No. 2 in its holding: Imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, in a case where the defendant continued to keep the stolen and lost stolen goods while making it difficult for the victim to exercise his/her right to claim return, and thereby maintaining illegal financial status, the crime of keeping stolen goods is established (see Supreme Court Decision 87Do163, Oct. 13, 1987, etc.). According to the records, the first criminal criminal criminal criminal defendant, even though the defendant knew that the mobile phone was stolen or lost, purchased stolen cell phone, which is a stolen object, and delivered it to the defendant at the time of his/her designation after receiving the instructions from the interested parties of the "C company" in the vicinity of the new subway Station in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, which was known that the cell phone was stolen or lost, while the second criminal criminal criminal act in the holding was committed under the direction of the "C company", even though he/she was aware that the cell phone was stolen or lost, and received the cell phone, which is a stolen object from his/her designated person, and kept it in the defendant's collection until it was delivered to the name of the deceased.