Where there is a conspiracy to forge a check which is the main and stolen property and receives a check for forgery, the crime of acquisition of stolen property;

Since the acquisition of stolen means the case of acquiring the right of disposal of stolen property, the acquisition of stolen stolen property cannot be deemed to be the case where the stolen property is acquired after the principal offender conspireds to use the stolen property together with forgery and receives the stolen property from the principal offender for forgery.

Article 362(1) of the Criminal Act

Defendant

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a short term of ten months, a long term of one year, and a fine of thirty million won.

When the above fine is not paid, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period calculated by converting the amount of KRW 5,000 into one day.

One hundred and twenty-five days of detention prior to the rendering of a judgment shall be included in the above imprisonment.

A counterfeited part of a family check seized shall be discarded in one sheet (No. 1).

One copy (No. 1) of the household check shall be returned to the victim.

The provisional payment of the amount equivalent to the above fine shall be ordered.

The charge of acquiring stolens among the facts charged of this case is not guilty.

Criminal facts

On July 19, 1985, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a short term of six months and a long term of eight months at the Seoul District Criminal Court for attempted larceny, etc., and was reinstated at the Kimcheon Juvenile Reformatory, and the execution of the sentence was completed on December 28 of the same year, in collusion with Nonindicted 1;

1. At around 17:00 on April 19, 1984, at the king located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, with the intention of exercising it at the king of 3rd unit, the defendant's face-to-face 05284035, the defendant's face-to-face 00 million won, the defendant's face-to-face 10,000 won, the defendant's face-to-face 10,000 won, the defendant's face-to-face 10,000 won, the defendant's face-to-face 10,000 won, the defendant's face-to-face 30,000 won, the defendant's face-to-face 10,000 won, the defendant's face-to-face 10,000 won, the defendant's face-to-face 30,000,000 won.

2. On April 19, 1986, around 20:00, when alcoholic beverages and safes are supplied to the Gaodong 107, Mapo-gu, Seoul, Mapo-gu, 107, in spite of the intention and ability to pay the price, Nonindicted 2, the owner of which would be pretended to receive 18,000 won of alcoholic beverages and safes, etc. from Nonindicted 2, the owner of which would be aware, and shall receive 50,000 won of household checks (fabb 05284037) forged to Nonindicted 2, as true, and shall exercise the right to receive 32,00 won of credit checks that were forged to Nonindicted 2, as true, and shall acquire 32,00 won from

3. At around 23:00 on the same day, Nonindicted 3, the main owner of the household located in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, obtained alcoholic beverages and an amount equivalent to KRW 85,000,00 from Nonindicted 3, the main owner of which in the above manner, and acquired them by fraud, and deliver a copy of KRW 100,000,00 (f) of the household check forged to him, as if he were genuine, to exercise it, and immediately obtain 15,000,000,000 won, from him;

4. On the 20th 20th 21:30 of the same month, although he was located in the same Dong, he was obtained from Nonindicted 4, the main owner of alcoholic beverages and an amount equivalent to KRW 80,000 by the foregoing method, and acquired them by fraud, and delivered to him a letter of KRW 100,000 (fab 05284040) of the household check that was forged to him as true, and exercises it by giving it as true, and acquires it by fraud immediately after being issued 20,000 won of the Sci

5. At around 23:30 on the same day, he/she acquires alcoholic beverages and an amount equivalent to KRW 70,000 from a person who is not the master's name in the same manner as above from the person who is not the master's name in the trade name in the same 88 location, and delivers to him/her a letter of KRW 100,000 (f) of a household check forged to him/her in the same manner as if he/she is true, and exercises such right by giving him/her a letter of KRW 100,000 (f) of a household check

6. On the 21st day of the same month, at around 01:30 of the same month, Nonindicted 3, the main owner of a large-scale 88 at the same time, obtained alcoholic beverages and an amount of KRW 100,000,00,00 from Nonindicted 3, the main owner of which in the same manner as above, and exercises by delivering to him a copy of the household check forged (f.e., a copy of KRW 100,000,00,000, under the true drinking

7. On the 20th day of the same month, at around 16:00, the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 3 372-49-372-49 was pretended to purchase rice to an employee non-indicted 5, and the family check which was forged with the intent to acquire the said scam money, was issued as a true rice price and exercised as if it were the real rice price, and the family check was issued as a 100,000 won (f., 05284035). In other words, the non-indicted 5, who believed that the scam check is true in the tin, had the non-indicted 5, who received 21,250 won of rice at the market price of 20 kilograms of rice to deliver it to the scambane's house in the neighboring name of the deceased.

The remainder of the facts in the facts of the ruling, except for the previous conviction,

1. Statement made by the defendant at this Court and suitable therefor;

1. Statement made by Nonindicted 6 in compliance with this Court

1. Each protocol of examination of the suspect against the defendant and non-indicted 6 prepared by the prosecutor, which corresponds to this.

1. Each statement in each statement prepared by the assistant judicial police officer with respect to the victim, Nonindicted 5, 6, 7, 8, 3, 4, and 9;

1. A statement prepared by Nonindicted 10, which is consistent with the statement

1. Detailed descriptions suitable for them from among copies of each household check attached to the investigation record; and

1. Statement suitable for the records of seizure prepared by the assistant judicial police officer;

1. Recognizing that two copies (No. 1 and 2) of seized household checks are present, each description thereof, etc. comprehensively; and

The finding of the previous convictions

1. Statement made by the defendant at this Court and suitable therefor;

1. The records of the criminal records of the defendant prepared by the head of the Seoul Seongbuk-gu Police Station can be recognized by the records suitable for them, and all the records of the judgment are proven.

Article 5 of the Control of Illegal Check Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 217 and Article 214 (1) of the Criminal Act shall apply to each of the above facts stated in the judgment of the defendant. Since each of the facts stated in the judgment falls under the provision of Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, the defendant shall choose each of the prescribed types of imprisonment for a crime of fraud, and since the defendant has a criminal record of attempted larceny, etc., he shall be sentenced to a repeated crime (limited to imprisonment for a crime of violation of the Regulation of Illegal Check as stated in the judgment, and limited amount of Article 42 of the Criminal Act) under Article 35 of the Criminal Act, and more than 100 won are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and since the above provision of Article 38 (1) 2, Article 30 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, the punishment of the defendant shall be imposed on the maximum amount of imprisonment for a crime of violation of Article 50 of the Criminal Act.

The summary of the facts charged as to the acquisition of stolen goods among the facts charged in this case is that the defendant acquired stolen goods despite being aware of the fact that he was stolen from Non-Indicted 1 at the king located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, at around 17:00 on April 19, 1986, three copies of the check (the check number 05284035, 05284038, 05284040, 052840), which is the money-dong branch of the Seoul Trust Bank, from the place where he stolen from Non-Indicted 1, the Defendant acquired stolen goods. According to the above evidence, the acquisition of stolen goods means the case where the above household checks were acquired from Non-Indicted 1 at the above date and at the same time, the defendant obtained the above household checks from Non-Indicted 1 at the above time to use them as the forged checks, and then, as recognized in the above part of the facts charged.

Thus, the defendant's receipt of the above check from non-indicted 1 is merely a receipt for forgery, and it is difficult to find that the defendant acquired the de facto disposal right of the above check, and there is no other evidence to find that the defendant acquired the de facto disposal right of the above check, so the above facts charged constitute a time when there is no proof of crime, and thus, the above facts charged is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Park Young-young (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice)