The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

around 01:15 on July 6, 2016, the Defendant embezzled the charge by keeping the documents on his own, in his own mind, the victim D, who was on board the Defendant’s cab, around 00:50 on the same day, around 00:50 on the day, at around 00:50, the victim D, who was on board the Defendant’s cab near the claim apartment complex, located in the 38 cab located in the city near Busan Seo-gu, Busan, and embezzled them by taking necessary procedures, such as acquiring the documents on the victim’s possession from another customer, and returning them to the victim, without taking necessary procedures.

Judgment

The crime of embezzlement is an offense completed by the act of acquiring the lost property, etc. with the intention of acquiring unlawful possession, and the prosecutor must prove that there is an act of embezzlement as an act of realizing the intent of acquiring unlawful possession. Thus, if there is no such evidence, it shall be based on strict evidence with probative value that makes a judge not having any reasonable doubt. Thus, even if there is no such evidence, even if there is suspicion of guilt against the defendant, it shall be determined as the interest of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 22, 2010). The defendant sought from the investigative agency to return the documents, which are the departing property of this case, from the possession of this case, even though he tried to do so from the investigation agency to the court, but did not return the documents, which are the departing property of this case, and that there is no intention to obtain unlawful acquisition.

In addition, according to the records, the defendant, along with E, operates F's C-business taxi (the defendant is from 15:30 to 03:30, the defendant is from 03:30, the defendant is from 03:30 to 15:30). The defendant, while operating the above business taxi, was acquiring documents bags as above on July 6, 2016 and stored in the ridge of the business taxi. At around 03:30 on the same day, the defendant was a taxi guest who provided the above documents bags to E at the time of shift.