Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Criminal facts

On August 15, 2017, around 03:00, the Defendant discovered and took a 8.50 million won of the market price owned by the victim E (24 tax) holding the floor located far away from the floor within the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “D” drinking house, and stolen the phone by means of discovering and putting it off.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Mobile phone photographs from damage;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made by E;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

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 concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. Determination on the assertion of the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which costs of lawsuit

1. The Defendant found the owner and brought the instant smartphone to return it, and there was no intention to acquire it.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted by this Court, the Defendant had an intention to obtain unlawful information.

Since the above argument is judged, it cannot be accepted.

① The Defendant discovered the instant smartphone, which is far away from the floor of the drinking house, and took the drinking house as it is without disclosing or disclosing the fact of learning from the drinking house owner or employee.

② The victim, immediately after becoming aware of the loss of the instant smartphone, was posted a phone on the instant smartphone, but the Defendant did not receive the phone.

뿐만 아니라 피고인은 피해자가 두 번째 전화를 걸자 곧바로 이 사건 스마트 폰의 전원을 껐고, 다음날까지 전원을 켜지 않았다.

③ The Defendant did not take measures to return the instant smartphone to the victim by the following day, and did not endeavor to charge the instant smartphone with beer for the instant smartphone.

④ The F had known the method by asking how the Defendant should find out smartphones lost at the time of the instant case.