beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. On August 12, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes at the Seoul Central District Court (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes). On May 31, 2012, the Seoul East District Court sentenced the Defendant to two years of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes). On April 4, 2014, the Defendant was
On April 8, 2014, at around 20:51 on April 20, 2014, the Defendant: (a) went after the victim E, who was in the subway No. 4 Line male toilet located in Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, about 392, tried to steal the Defendant by inserting his hand on the left side of the victim’s money; (b) but was discovered by the victim and attempted to do so.
2. Each legal statement of the witness F and G is merely a warning from the victim to the effect that “the defendant was intending to capture the goods to the left Australian machine of the victim and stolen the goods.” As such, the direct evidence corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case is sufficient to record the statement of the police statement of the victim E.
However, in light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, the victim's statement is difficult to be reliable, and there is no other evidence to prove the facts charged.
Therefore, the facts charged of this case cannot be deemed to have been proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt only with the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.
① The victim stated in the police investigation that “The victim was waiting for about 3 to 4 minutes in front of the second toilet door,” but the Defendant, behind the police investigation, attempted to put his hand into the left part of the victim and see what he would be.”
However, at the site of the case, the victim entered around 20:49:4, and the defendant entered around 20:50:34, respectively, and the victim entered around 20:51:57.