logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2019.10.10 2019고정272
절도
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. At around 19:19, the Defendant: (a) did not calculate the victim F (year 31) at the E store located in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-si, the 19:19th day of the facts charged; (b) instead of calculating the 95,400 won of the market price between the victim F (year 31) and the negligent surveillance, the Defendant committed theft by means of discharging out of the store.

2. The defense counsel and the defendant asserted that, at the time of the case, the defendant was aware of the addition of shopping together at the time of the case that the new launch of this case was calculated and went out of the store, and that there was no intention to larceny.

In light of the records, the above changes between the defendant and his defense counsel are acceptable in full view of the following circumstances revealed, and it is not determined that the defendant intentionally reported the new case of larceny in this case.

① The Defendant’s birth on the day of the instant case was 23 years of age, and the Defendant’s her clothes, etc. were put up as a daily gift, and the Defendant’s her total three female-gu was put up in a roof.

② The Defendant worn the instant signals from the Defendant F (victim) in the small wave of the instant burial, and the Defendant’s new shoes reported by the Defendant was upon request from the said occupant upon her request to put them in an empty shopping white.

After receiving an empty shopping bag or a shopping bag containing the Defendant’s existing new shoes from the above point of view, the Defendant purchased clothes in G stores, etc. at the store without any settlement (in the form of wearing the instant new box), and then called “G stores” out of the store without paying any settlement (in the form of a string, the distance between the store and the string store is not far away from the store, and the distance between the store and the string store).

(3) The defendant's referring to G stores made a normal settlement by credit card when purchasing clothing.

(Evidence No. 1) No. 1 of this case.

arrow