2. In a case where an offender and the victim neglected to examine whether or not they have a relationship of kinship under Article 328(2) of the Criminal Act and whether or not they have filed a complaint from the victim, the trial has not been conducted, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on crimes and complaints between relatives.

According to the records, according to the records, the statement of witness against the thief victim of this case (No. 23 of the record), the statement of witness about the preparation of handling affairs by the judicial police officer (No. 8 of the investigation record), the suspect interrogation protocol (No. 32 and No. 14 of the investigation record) against the defendant in the preparation of handling affairs by the prosecutor and the judicial police officer, the defendant stated that thief victim of this case has the statement that thief victim of this case is the denial of her mother's mother, i.e., the high-speed relationship, and the victim does not want punishment. If the above victim's statement is true, thief of thief, the victim and the defendant have a relationship of relatives as provided in Article 328 (2) of the Criminal Act applied mutatis mutandis by Article 34 of the Criminal Act (see Article 777 subparagraph 4 of the Civil Act), and the court below should have tried about the existence of the above relationship with the above thief victim of this case, thereby it should be reversed the judgment of this case and remanded.

Justices Kim Yoon-Jeng (Presiding Justice)