logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.02.06 2017고단921
특수절도
Text

1. Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for a period of one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants came to know at the first managed by the victim H in Y in YY in Ycheon-si, as well as at the next lowest part of the line.

1. On February 15, 2017, Defendant A’s sole crime committed by Defendant A opened a box and brought the content of the box while Defendant A opened the box, where two strings in the market value and one strings in the USB cable.

Accordingly, Defendant A stolen the victim’s property.

2. On February 16, 2017, at around 18:09, the Defendants committed the joint crimes of the Defendants: (a) around 16, 2017, at the market price of the above I, the Defendant B collected the above substitute damages; (b) around 19:43 on the same day, the Defendants removed the substitute damages, and (c) Defendant A removed the substitute damages, and brought the goods.

As a result, the defendants stolen the victim's property together.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Partial statement of the witness A;

1. A H statement;

1. In the investigation report (STV video attachment) (Defendant B and the defense counsel claimed that Defendant A was entitled to partially cut off the selective compensation, and Defendant B was aware that the selective compensation was the selective compensation suffered by mistake, and that Defendant B was only entitled to partially cut off the selective compensation.

Defendant

B With respect to its circumstances, Defendant A had “three goods and deducted them” by the prosecution.

Examining CCTV images at the time of the statement, Defendant B’s 18:06:43, around 18:07:47, and around 18:08:12, each of the substitute damages on the trucking vehicle. As such, Defendant A cannot be deemed to have granted three substitute damages to Defendant B.

In particular, considering the around 18:07 :47, the defendant A can confirm that the defendant A left the cargo vehicle to adjust the level while he returned to the cargo vehicle.

Thus, Defendant B seems to have set one substitute compensation according to his own judgment.

Accordingly, Defendant B is the defendant.

arrow