beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. Summary of the facts charged in this case
A. A. The Defendant: (a) around November 2, 2017, at Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around 06:15, he/she takes up a thief and a thief card with a new bank head at the seat of the victim D, a customer among the Do residents working as his/her employees; (b) around November 2, 2017.
B. (B) On November 2, 2017, the Defendant stolen the property against the will of the manager of the said ATM device by inserting the FF convenience store located in Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul. Around November 2, 2017, the Defendant stolen the property against the will of the manager of the said AM device by inserting the FF store card, which was owned by the D in the foregoing paragraph (a), and dividing the password, and withdrawing 300,000 won in cash owned by the victim on two occasions.
2) On November 2, 2017, at around 13:42, the Defendant, at the subway station located in the subway station located in 180 as Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Han River, stolen the property against the will of the manager of the said AMF equipment, by inserting a new card, which is owned by the D in the foregoing paragraph (a), and dividing the password into two occasions, and taking 300,000 won in cash, each of which exceeds 60,000 won, on two occasions.
(c)
The Defendant violated the law of finance business specializing in credit was unlawfully using a stolen credit card as stated above b. 2.
2. In a criminal trial, the recognition of facts constituting a crime ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not reach the extent that the prosecutor is able to have a sufficient conviction, even if there are circumstances, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictoryly or uncomfortable fear of guilt, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Do1549, May 30, 2017). In order to be found guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant stolen the victim’s new bank crow card and a new card (hereinafter “the instant card”).