Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the director who operates Cmina in Sejong City B, and the victim D is an employee who worked in the above beauty art room from July 20, 2019 to August 20, 2019.

On August 25, 2019, the Defendant, at the beauty art room around 2019, caused disputes over the settlement of benefits with the victim. At the beauty art room, the Defendant concealed the property owned by the victim and made its utility by concealing three cosmetics, including three 2,70,00 won in total, three 1,00,000 won in total, three 4,90,000 won in total, 3,000 won in total, and 1,00,000 won in total.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (a text dialogue with C Director submitted by a victim);

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 366 of the Selection of Punishment;

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The remainder of facts, excluding the market price of beauty art tools asserted by the defendant and his defense counsel, are recognized;

(1) In the first facts charged, the Defendant did not have any criminal intent to conceal the property of the victim in light of the following: (a) although the value of the cosmetic was indicated as “market price,” the Prosecutor corrected all of these values to “purchase price,” and thus, there is no practical benefit in dispute over the market price; and (b) on the date of trial, the Defendant demanded the victim to find the cosmetic. However, in light of the fact that the Defendant demanded the victim to recover the cosmetic, the Defendant was in fact in charge of

In addition, since the defendant has received money from the victim, the defendant has kept the property owned by the victim temporarily, so it is a legitimate act as a right of retention under the civil law.

2. Article 366 of the Criminal Act provides for the relevant legal principles.