logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.08.22 2019고정466
절도
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 16, 2018, at the front of the "C" located in the Busan Jin-gu, Busan, the Defendant stopped the victim E in front of the G in the Dong-gu, Busan, where the victim was born to the D taxi in the direction of the G located in the Gu of Busan, which is located in the city of Busan. On September 16, 2018, the Defendant left the 760,000,000 won of the market price of the Defendant’s taxi, with a gallon 9 smartphone, 3 gallon, 1 copy of the IBK C C C, and 1 copy of the KB C card, while moving the above gallon to another place in the vicinity of the neighboring convenience points in order to pay KRW 5,000,00 of the taxi fee, and brought about theft by means of the above smartphone.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of some of the accused;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and H;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. E statements;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant and his defense counsel had operated the victim on the taxi at the time and time specified in the facts charged, although the defendant had no cash and the card to pay the taxi charges, the victim cannot be found to have left for a long time and waited for the illegal crackdown of parking and stopping and moving the taxi to the taxi without paying the taxi charges, contrary to the facts charged, the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant did not have a permanent domicile or cell phone of the victim before and after the moving of the taxi and that there was no theft.

In full view of all the circumstances revealed in the record, including the evidence mentioned above and the video records of the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle on the day of the occurrence of the crime, the above assertion is not accepted since it can be sufficiently recognized.

Application of Statutes

1. Criminal facts;

arrow