logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2014.11.14 2014고단1561
야간건조물침입절도등
Text

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and for six months, respectively.

on the part of the defendant B.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A

A. At night, around November 19, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 22:25, the victim F, in Yongsan-gu, Seoul, opened a door to the entrance and exit of the victim F, while having the key to the entrance. After the victim retired, the Defendant knew that there was no person who manages the said G goods, opened a door to the entrance and intrude into the G, which is a structure.

In addition, the Defendant committed theft with approximately KRW 23,442,60 of the market price owned by the victim over 26 times from October 13, 2012 to November 19, 2013, such as having approximately KRW 1,517,00 of the market price owned by the victim.

B. The Defendant’s unlawful uttering of official document is above the beginning of July 2013.

In order to sell the stolen Gul, F, which H, to the J located in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu Seoul.

At this time, the defendant presented the first-class ordinary driver's license of the defendant who was named in the name of the director of the Seoul Provincial Police Agency, who was requested by H to verify his status and was in possession, as if he were the defendant's driver's license.

Accordingly, the defendant did not use official documents.

2. B The Defendant is a person who operates a secondhand body in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan City L with the trade name of M, and is engaged in resource trading and other resource trading activities.

On November 19, 2013, at around 23:30, the Defendant purchased saves that he stolen from A as described in the above paragraph (1).

In such cases, the defendant, who is engaged in the trade of resources such as old interest, has a duty of care to verify whether he/she is stolen by ascertaining the personal information, etc. of A, while he/she has a duty of care to verify the reason why he/she acquired the old interest, the motive for the sale, and

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected the above care and made a judgment on the stolen.

arrow