Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On July 28, 2014, at around 01:00, the Defendant knew that the victim C, who was stolen by B, around the Hanjin-dong, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, was a stolen charge of the 800,000 won of the market value of the victim C, the Defendant sold it to the purchaser of the non-name cell phone searched through the Internet website, and arranged the transfer of the stolen charge by calling the purchaser of the stolen mobile phone in the vicinity of the Hanjin-dong, Yongsan-gu, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of the police as to B;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Data on analysis of details of DNA prepaid phone calls and each investigation report thereon;

1. The Defendant alleged that the crime of aiding and abetting stolen goods is not established because he/she did not sell the cell phone actually, but that the Defendant alleged that the crime of aiding and abetting stolen goods is not established. However, in the crime of aiding and abetting stolen goods under Article 362(2) of the Criminal Act, the term “conciliation” means acquiring, transferring, transporting, or storing stolen goods between the parties who intend to acquire, transfer, transport, or store stolen goods, and therefore, in cases where, while being aware of the fact that the stolen goods are stolen, the Defendant acting as a broker or promoted convenience in the acquisition, transfer, transport, or storage of stolen goods by linking each other between the parties who intend to acquire, transfer, transport, or store stolen goods, the crime of aiding and abetting stolen goods is established even if the contract on the actual acquisition, transfer, transportation, or storage of stolen goods is not concluded between the parties or the possession of stolen goods is not transferred actually (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1203, Apr. 23, 2009).

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 362 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 362 (2) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning criminal facts;

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

1. The order of provisional payment;