A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant: (a) obtained one resident registration certificate, the owner of which was lost by the victim B (the 76-year old age), at a new distribution terminal, etc. in Seocho-gu, Seoul, from February 2014 to March 2, 2014; (b) but did not follow necessary procedures, such as returning the acquired property to the victim; and (c) embezzled the victim’s resident registration certificate (the 67-year-old age), D(the 67-old age), E(the 57-year-old age) and F(the 57-year-old age-old age-based age-based welfare card; and (d) embezzled the victims’ property on five occasions in total.

2. Around 10:40 on April 26, 2014, the Defendant violated the Resident Registration Act: (a) purchased the disposable passenger ticket at KRW 500,00, which is a senior citizen-friendly price (1,650 won), using the victim’s resident registration certificate, who was found to have the same as paragraph (1), in front of the subway waiting room 3, 194 Gangnam-nam High-speed Terminal 2nd underground, Gangnam-gu, Seoul High-speed Terminal 194; and (b) purchased the disposable passenger ticket at KRW 500, the arm’s length price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Seizure records, etc.;

1. Application of the G’s written Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 360(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Article 37 subparag. 8 of the Resident Registration Act (Selection of Imprisonment);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence is that, even if the defendant was punished three times from around 2013 to around 2014 for the same crime, it cannot be deemed that the crime of this case was committed again. However, rather than using personal information on the acquired identification card, it appears that the defendant was mainly used for the reduction of the charge for the subway boarding pass (the investigative record 47-52 pages), rather than using the personal information on the acquired identification card (the investigative record 47-52 pages), the defendant did not have any record of being sentenced to the suspended sentence or heavier than the fine, and there was no record of being sentenced to the punishment other than the punishment by a fine