Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On July 2014, the Defendant: (a) committed theft with one copy of the statement of the corporate account transactions on the part of the victim Co., Ltd. D in the office located in Daegu Northern-gu, Inc., Ltd., the Defendant, who was on the books of accounting E located in the office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of part of the statement in the first interrogation protocol against the accused in the prosecution (including the statement in F and G);

1. The second-time suspect examination protocol against the accused;

1. Each police statement made to F and G;

1. A complaint and a petition filed by the F;

1. Details of transactions;

1. A copy of the investigation report (a copy of the court records No. 2015 No. 346 of the Daegu High Court Decision 2015 No. 346) and a copy of the "Submission of reference materials"

1. Three copies of the investigation report (report on the details of transactions in D's account among the records of trial in Daegu High Court 2015No 346, 2015), and three copies of the statement of transactions in D's account;

1. Investigation report (Attachment to the register of a corporation D) and application of the statutes governing certified copies of the register of a corporation;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order. The Defendant and the defense counsel submitted by the Defendant to the Daegu District Court 2014 High Court 664 High Gohap64 (Seoul High Court 2015No. 346) case (hereinafter “the account transaction statement of this case”) by printing out the X-cell file sent through Internet e-mail from E, who is an accounting employee, from the I’s office, from the I’s office. The account transaction statement itself does not constitute information and does not constitute theft, even if the account transaction details received through Internet e-mail were copied or printed, it does not constitute information itself, or there is no possibility of reducing the occupation and use of the victim, and thus, the act of copying or printing them does not constitute theft, and there is no intention of unlawful acquisition.