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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On October 1, 2012, at around 16:00, the Defendant acquired 300,000 won in cash, each of which is the loss of the victim E, 2 half of the market value, 400,000 won in half of the amount, 13 of passbooks, 13 of passbooks, 4 credit card, 1 of resident registration certificate, 1 of seal imprints, and 1 of the market value.

The Defendant, without taking necessary procedures such as returning the acquired property to the victim, embezzled the property he/she had on his/her own mind.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. The prosecutor's statement concerning the F;

1. CCTV photographs of theft suspects;

1. Photographs of damaged articles;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel by the investigation report (report attached to the husband's F confirmation document), investigation report (report on CCTV image verification submitted to the husband of the victim)

1. Although the gist of the assertion was found to have obtained the victim's fingers, only the head of the Tong and the seal were included therein, and no other property was included therein.

2. The victim E has credibility as it stated in detail that in order to deposit the profits generated by operating a restaurant from the investigative agency to the court of this case by inserting money from the bank, and going to the restaurant by using the Do telephone, and return to the restaurant, and the knife lost the knife, and the knife stated that the knife included the damaged criminal facts as indicated in the judgment, the reason why the knife lost the knife, the name and the quantity of the damaged goods that were contained in the knife, and there is evidence corresponding to this, such as F Public Prosecutor’s protocol, investigation report (the victim’s husband’s document attached to knife report).

On the other hand, in relation to the damaged goods, the defendant makes a consistent statement that there was no other things than the head of the Tong and the seal within the hand room from the investigative agency to this court.