From August 25, 2012 to October 14, 27, 200 of the same year, the Defendant opened the 5th floor HPC entrance of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City G building through I and stolen the amount of KRW 24,00,000,000, CPU, 11, and the remaining 29 units of this body, which were located in the victim’s computer owned by the Defendant.

2. Although the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that he/she had been offered a waiver of the garment, the Defendant and the defense counsel did not consent to the proposal at the time of the proposal because the management expenses incurred in pushed away from F on July 2012 are too much high, so it is not enough to sell the garment, such as computers, within HPC.

Therefore, although the defendant brought computer, etc. on the date and time stated in the facts charged, the defendant asserts that larceny is not established because the things are owned by the defendant.

3. Determination

A. The term “the theft” means the removal of property owned by another person from possession against the will of the possessor and the removal of property owned by another person to his or her or a third person. Whether a certain property is occupied by another person shall be determined by considering the intention of control as a subjective element in addition to the scope of management or the feasibility of factual management as an objective element, and ultimately, by considering the form of the pertinent property and other specific circumstances, from a normative standpoint in light of social norms

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3252, Jul. 10, 2008). B.

First, it is examined whether the defendant received the offer from the firstman on July 2012, 201 to waive the collection of computers, etc. in HPC instead of the unpaid management expenses.

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, F is the defendant and the management expenses.