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

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On April 14, 2017, around 19:34, the Defendant: (a) filed an investigation report (calculated amount of damage) on the market value before the victim D’s house located in the Seoul Special Self-Governing Zone C, which was owned by the victim; and (b) made it difficult to specify the amount of damage.

A theft was made with one chemical part of the Council.

Summary of Evidence

1. Written statements of D;

1. The application of the investigation report (the form of a suspect exposed toCCTV images), the investigation report (Attachment, such as photographs shown to the suspect), and the application of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the investigation report (specific suspect);

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 329 of the choice of punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the amount of damage for the reason of sentencing is minor, the victim does not want the punishment against the defendant, the defendant does not recognize his/her mistake and is consistent with the defense that he/she does not memory, and the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, circumstances of the crime, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., and all the conditions of the punishment specified in the arguments shall be comprehensively taken into account.

Innocence

1. The summary of the facts charged was calculated by the Defendant as KRW 25,00,00, which is owned by the victim at the same time and place as the facts charged in the judgment, based on the investigation report (calculated amount of damage). The amount of damage was calculated as KRW 5,00 per minute and per kimchi.

Along with a considerable amount of 4 chemical parts and a chip tank, they were stolen with one chip.

2. The statement of the victim of the judgment is merely about the type and quantity of the damaged goods, and a critical evidence;

CCTV images, which can be seen, are taken by the defendant as one of the victims, and only the image of the victim is taken.

In addition, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendant additionally stolen four parts and one part of kimchi in addition to the facts constituting a crime, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that there is no other evidence.

3. Conclusion.