Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On August 28, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of larceny and Resident Registration Act at the Seoul Western District Court for the same year and two years of suspended execution for ten months.

9.5 The decision becomes final and conclusive and is currently suspended.

1. No person who violates the Resident Registration Act shall unlawfully use another person's resident registration certificate;

Nevertheless, at around 12:00 on September 15, 2014, the Defendant issued a prescription for the said time limit and used another person’s resident registration number by giving notice of the name and resident registration number of the victim F (n, 38 years old) known at the time when he/she works as the assistant nurse in the preliminary field, in order to purchase in excess of the “Evisa” hospital located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, for which sales per capita are restricted.

2. At around 12:09 on the date indicated in the above 1.1. (1), the Defendant: (a) taken advantage of the fact that the victim G (at 37 years of age) who was waiting for medical treatment (at the same hospital) took a place to drink water; (b) taken advantage of the victim’s 50,000 won merchandise coupon 1, credit card 2, and driver’s license 50,000 won at the market price where the victim’s 1.0 billion won was located following the victim’s hair, one was stolen.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. G statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Attachment of medical records);

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 37 subparagraph 10 of the Resident Registration Act, and selection of fines;

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

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

1. As to the defense counsel’s assertion of provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the defense counsel asserts to the effect that the defendant suffered a fixed mental illness due to the existence of materials with a friendly branch, and that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder at the time of the crime of this case. As such, the records are examined.