logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.22 2019고정2504
절도
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From July 23, 2019 to July 24, 2019, the Defendant stolen money and valuables worth KRW 1,124,000,000, total market price, such as the two-way B-dong trains in Yangju-si, Incheon, and the two-way train 2-4, which are located around the vicinity, with the market price of the victim C, and KRW 1,100,000,000, the market price of which is located in the Nowon-gu, and KRW 1,100,00,000, and KRW 1,124,000,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. A report on damage filed in the C preparation;

1. Statement by the police about C (victim);

1. Determination as to the defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion on the investigation report (a case of confirming the amount of damage), investigation report (a case of confirming the state of damaged goods

1. The defendant alleged that he was guilty of the lost property and brought about to find the owner, but did not have the intention of larceny and illegal acquisition.

2. In light of the following facts or circumstances revealed by each of the above evidence, namely, the Defendant alleged that the Defendant was guilty of lost property because there was no reason under the line where the instant bank was located, but the victim was on board the same column. However, the Defendant did not make efforts to return the bank to the principal by visiting the police station for about 20 days on August 11, 2019, by visiting the police station for about 20 days until the contact was made by the police officer. In light of the above facts and circumstances, in a case where the instant street program operated normally before the loss but was found to have been lost, the Defendant had to install the window program again, and in accordance with each of the above evidence, the intention of larceny and illegal acquisition was recognized.

Therefore, the above argument cannot be accepted.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime and Article 329 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The order of provisional payment;

arrow