beta
Text
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
Reasons
1. On January 21, 2019, the Defendant: (a) reported at the “C” restaurant located in Ansan-si, a member B of Ansan-si, on the 19:27th day of Jan. 21, 2019; and (b) opened his key to a place where one half of his key is located; and (c) made use of his key together with the victim D owner’s key, one of the 18K gold bars worth KRW 300,000 at the victim D’s market price.
Accordingly, the Defendant stolen the property owned by the victim.
2. The following facts or circumstances are acknowledged according to the entries in the police interrogation protocol against the Defendant, the results of the CCTV image reproduction, the record of seizure, each entry in the seizure list, the images of seized objects, the report of internal investigation (CCTV image analysis), the entries in CCTV photograph data and images.
The victim was set up in the calculation unit, and there was only a period of time at the side of the calculation unit.
After completing meals with the Defendant’s husband and wife, the Defendant left the direction of the calculated part, and then laid down the handphone on the left hand, which was the key of the handphone, which was located on the calculated part of the Defendant’s husband and wife, and then laid down the handphone and the key tending, respectively. The Defendant was dead at the calculated part of the calculated part of the Defendant.
At the time of the defendant's above conduct, the cover was closed.
On the other hand, the Defendant: (a) led her keys by a bad hand, etc., brought her key into the knive hand, and took action to her left hand; and (b) her hand, at that time, her key seems to be able to take her key and her counter to it.
(A) If the Defendant was less than the key, barring any special circumstance, he would inevitably fall into the reflective floor, and the key tending was removed from the calculation unit. The Defendant collected the handphone and the key tending, and went out of the restaurant, and then paid the meal cost by her husband Handphone.
At this time, the Defendant.