The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Around 10:00 on August 6, 2016, the Defendant: (a) taken the front of Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government road; (b) taken a taxi operated by D on the cab; and (c) discovered one jum-on 3 mobile phones owned by the victim F (16 years old) holding the front door door door of the said taxi and found the owner of the jum-on jum-on jum, which was located in the space for the receipt of the front door of the said taxi.

2. In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, although the defendant discovered the mobile phone that the victim gets on a taxi, found the aforementioned mobile phone from the cab and found the cab driver the above mobile phone, but it was acknowledged that the cab driver was aware of the victim 's use of the cab, which is a smartphone, and again saw the defendant again, and that the defendant saw the cab with the above mobile phone to find the cab owner's name, and that the defendant got on the cab. Accordingly, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone at the time when the defendant carried on the cab, there was an intention of illegal acquisition.

It is difficult to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting a crime, a judgment of innocence is rendered after the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, but the defendant does not consent to the public notice of the judgment of innocence, and thus, the public notice of the judgment of innocence is not ordered under the proviso of Article 58 (2)