logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2015.07.10 2015고단27
절도
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates the 3rd floor of the Goyang-gu C building in Gyeyang-gu.

At around 15:00 on November 27, 2013, the Defendant: (a) mobilized the body of the victim F (n, 60 years of age) in the arboretum farmers’ managing the victim F (n, female, and 60 years of age); and (b) arbitrarily cut 30 shares of the victim’s own market price, which is planted in the relevant place, brought about 30 shares of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Some of the suspect interrogation records of the accused to the prosecution (including the F substitute part);

1. Each police interrogation protocol of G and H:

1. Recording notes;

1. The current status of work by November 1 through 30, 2013, such as the details of currencies, etc. and D police officer's book;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

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

1. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The head of the State shall complete consultation with the victim on the species, quantities, and prices of sale in currency prior to the day of the instant case, and instruct G to extract the instant sub-owned trees, and even if there was no explicit consent or understanding of the victim, there was no intention to commit larceny, since the victim was mistaken at least the victim’s understanding or consent at the time of the said currency.

2. The following circumstances revealed through the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court of this case, namely, the victim of a newly established institution, who had no intention to trade with the defendant at the time of the call from the investigative agency to this court, consistently stated from the investigative agency to the effect that "the victim was aware of the theft of the instant self-owned tree, as he was sent to the deaf on December 6, 2013, and the Defendant became aware of the theft of the instant self-owned tree."

arrow