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

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

Punishment of the crime

1. Around 06:00 on June 4, 2014, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Drivers, Violence, etc.) committed assault against the victim on the ground that the victim was aboard the front seat of the C cab located in the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, and became a two-dimensional single apartment with a destination, and the victim went into the front seat of the Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, on the ground that he was going to go through the bus only after the bus, and used the victim’s face twice as a drinking, and used the victim’s side by going through the cab from the taxi.

2. The Defendant: (a) committed an assault against the victim at a time and place identical to the preceding paragraph; and (b) committed a theft by citing the credit card and handphones owned by the victim with cash of KRW 50,000,000 in a 112 report.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs and photographs of seized articles;

1. Article 5-10 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 5-10 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Selection of each fine;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The defendant's assertion of Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the defendant's assertion of the order of provisional payment is asserted to the effect that there was no intention of unlawful acquisition, since the defendant's act of larceny in this case brought about the cell phone of the victim with credit cards and cash in order to identify the identity of the victim and to exchange with his own bank because the victim's work clothes at the time of committing the larceny in this case.

Therefore, the intention of illegal acquisition necessary for the establishment of larceny refers to the intention of excluding the right holder and to use and dispose of another person's property as his own property, and it does not need to possess the economic benefit of the property permanently.

Supreme Court Decision 2012Do132 Decided July 12, 2012