A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who lives with collecting secondhand water.

On April 3, 2017, the Defendant, at the front of the ‘D cafeteria' parking lot in Kim Jong-si on April 10:47, 2017, stolen one sheet (one sheet, one sheet, and spawn) from the market price unbrupted in the front of the ‘D cafeteria' parking lot in the city of Kim Jong-si, by using the gap in which the surveillance of the victim E(S) was neglected, and loaded one sheet (one sheet, one sheet, and spawn) into the high water collection vehicle at the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of E;

1. E statements;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Article 329 of the choice of punishment;

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant and the Defendant did not have the intention of larceny since they thought that the damaged party would be the abandoned article due to the reason that they did not have the intention of larceny.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence revealed earlier, namely, ① the Defendant’s goods used to avoid carbon in the following parts: (a) the shot shot, shot shot, and shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot, the Defendant’s goods are considered to have been easily known as goods necessary for the Defendant’s business; and (b) the victim newly purchased the said goods while running the restaurant on March 17, 2017. The above goods were new ones that were not used for one month; and (c) the Defendant misleads the Defendant as to the

One of the arguments is the victim's statement to the effect that "the scrap collected, such as abolition, has a place where they are stored in the roadside, and the paint is placed in the same manner as the goods that are ordinarily used next to the restaurant, and thus cannot be mistaken as it is." (4) The defendant brought the paint into the above chemical, and then asked or asked whether it is the goods abandoned by the victim.