Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in wholesale and retail business such as steel in the trade name of Co., Ltd. D at the time of harmony.

On August 3, 2016, the Defendant: (a) as a broker of E and F around August 3, 2016, the lower court owned by the Defendant Company G at the pertinent workplace Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) may ex officio change criminal facts within the scope consistent with the facts charged, insofar as the Defendant did not infringe on the Defendant’s right to defense; (b) according to each of the J, L’s police statements, and acceptance certificates, the iron bars that I stolen are recognized as owned by G Co., Ltd.; and (c) the Defendant argued to the effect that the Defendant did not have a duty of care in light of the practice of the distribution industry in which he does not ask sources when trading surplus steel bars

As such, the above facts of the crime are changed.

J. H. 10m fake raw materials that were stolen by I, the production director of H. H.

26.348 tons ( considerable to KRW 14,754,880) have been acquired in 13,174,000.

In such cases, a person engaged in the wholesale retail business of steel, etc. is the owner of the above raw materials for steel, and in some circumstances, the owner of the above large quantity of raw materials for steel should be confirmed, and there was a duty of care to enter the quantity and type of steel in the purchase ledger, purchase price, seller, etc.

Nevertheless, upon the above F’s request, the Defendant paid the price of the steel goods for the Defendant’s funds, and did not issue a tax invoice, but did not enter in the purchase ledger book. In general, the Defendant did not receive a trade statement from a cargo article to be kept by the steel sales business entity, and did not receive a trade statement from a cargo article to be kept by the delivery business entity, and issued a letter of acceptance sent by the cargo article to the delivery business entity under the name of “I”, which was negligent in performing the above duty of care, from that time, the Defendant acquired the steel goods, which are the stolen goods, from that time.