When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On January 28, 2014, at around 10:10 on January 28, 2014, the Defendant used approximately 70 corporate bankbooks owned by the victim corporation D, one comprehensive construction corporation leader, two representative directors of the victim, and one document room owned by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. A protocol of partial police interrogation of the accused;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. Each statement of E and F;

1. Copies of all the registered matters;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of stolen damaged goods, 77 photographs and seals, and 10 photographs of the bankbooks in the corporation and the D Self-Governing Management Body; and

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The amount of fine determined by the summary order shall be reduced partly by taking into account the fact that the representative director of the victim, who has the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, wanted to have the Defendant’s prior domicile, the relationship between the victim and the Defendant, and the circumstances of the instant case. In light of the fact that the Defendant had each passbook, etc. entered in the judgment and the defense counsel’s argument, E and F consistent statement, and immediately following the instant case, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant stolen each passbook,