If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

On July 16, 2020, at around 05:20 on July 16, 2020, the Defendant used a creb in cleaning a white iron table in an amount equivalent to KRW 100,000,00, the market value of which the Defendant owned by C in the vicinity of the entrance of the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B building, and carried with the said table.

Accordingly, the Defendant stolen the property owned by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. The protocol of seizure and list of seized articles C’s written statement in the Defendant’s partial statement at the court, each internal investigation report and investigation report, and the application of the statute to report occurrence of seized articles

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order [The Defendant and his defense counsel set up a steel at a place where recyclable garbage is left, and thus, he did not have any intention to commit theft.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence, namely, (1) the victim was engaged in cleaning at the front of the utility pole located immediately before the building, and there was no waste at all around the utility pole at that time; (2) the defendant was unbrupted to the extent that the victim left the vehicle after leaving the vehicle in the situation where the victim is cleaning, and then left the vehicle in his own vehicle after leaving the trustee, and (3) the consignee was unbrupted to the extent that it cannot be seen as a burnerd article.

(4) Nevertheless, the Defendant did not see that the damaged person was cleaning.

In full view of the following facts: (a) as a result of the Defendant’s assertion and without taking all measures to confirm that the consignee was an article abandoned at the time when the consignee was brought to the outside of the building or the neighboring person; and (b) as a result, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant has the criminal intent of theft.

However, the stolen damage has been confiscated and the victim has not wanted to be punished.