logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2015.06.17 2015고정304
장물알선등
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A

A. On July 2014, at around 07:00, the Defendant acquired one S5 gallon in a gallon of commercial buildings around the Amarsan Station in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, where C was lost, at around KRW 900,00,000.

The Defendant did not take necessary procedures, such as returning the acquired property to the victim, but did so.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property that has been separated from the possession of the victim.

B. At around 19:00 on August 2, 2014, the Defendant: (a) requested that the “EPC bank” located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (EPC); (b) the female-friendly job offers F to find one selling place of galthoos 51 that he acquired as above.

The F, upon the above request, searched a person who purchased a stolen mobile phone from the “number of cell phones” which is a mobile phone display room, and then, at around 19:10 on the same day, agreed to sell the mobile phone at the street of the purchaser and the Gwangjin-gu 33-24 prior to the same day.

At that time, the Defendant received a request from the said purchaser for sale of gallon No No. 31,00,000 won at the market price owned by the victim G, which was stolen by F from F from the above PC bank, and tried to sell the said mobile phone at the above promise place around August 2, 2014, knowing that the aforementioned mobile phone was stolen, around 19:10,000.

Accordingly, the defendant assisted the transfer of stolen goods.

2. On May 1, 2014, Defendant B acquired 80,000 Aphone 50,000, the market price of the 800,000 won owned by the victim H, which was lost by the victim H, in the franchis transfer of the franchis instigates-gu, Nam-gu, Gwangju.

The Defendant did not take necessary procedures, such as returning the acquired property to the victim, but did so.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property that has been separated from the possession of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect against I or F;

1. The respective laws and regulations of C and H.

arrow