beta
Text
Defendants are not guilty.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is combined with the Defendants, and around 08:50 on March 24, 2012, in the factory in Pyeongtaek-si E (hereinafter referred to as “F”), the victim’s written indictment for the resolution of the resolution of the settlement of accounts for the victims, which was kept in custody, is written in G. However, G is the representative director of the resolution of the resolution of the settlement of accounts for the victims, and it is reasonable to view it as the victim as the F
The market price was approximately KRW 2.40,00,000, such as two air conditioners, four air conditioners, one air conditioners, and one hot water tank, and stolen them by means of loading them with the property of approximately KRW 2.94,00,00.
2. Determination
A. The Defendants and their defense counsel asserted that they had the items indicated in the facts charged. However, the Defendants and their defense counsel asserted that “the two air conditioners, four air conditioners, one air conditioners, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “air conditioners, etc.”) among them were the goods used in F’s work, and they merely thought and taken the H’s goods, and thus, they did not have any awareness of the other party of the H’s property or did it. Thus, the Defendants and their defense counsel did not constitute a element for larceny, and it does not constitute a element for larceny, and it does not constitute larceny. Even if the larceny was established, Defendant B merely had different knowledge of Defendant A’s employees in accordance with the direction, and thus there was no intention to commit larceny or there was no conspiracy.
B. (1) The following facts are acknowledged according to the Defendants’ respective legal statements, the witness I’s testimony at the investigative agency and court, the witness J’s legal statement, the investigation report (electronic tax invoices, etc.) etc.
(A) The complainant G is the representative director of F, the defendant A is the representative director of H, and the defendant B is the employee of H.
(B) F and H have used the entrances and finishings of each plant as a company of the same kind, which affix plastic products, together with the entrances and finishings of each plant, before the said G was appointed as a representative director of F.