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

The Defendant was aware of it in Chuncheon-si B on August 4, 2017, at around 07:00.

C Where there is a prefabricated-type panel building, the building can be removed and removed, it shall be removed.

In the phrase “A”, it was stolen by having C carry 1.8 million won at the market price of the prefabricated-type building (3.5m wide x 8m long) owned by the victim D, which was located at that place, into five tons and loaded into five tons of cargo.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including the substitution of the accused);

1. Police statements made to D, C, and E;

1. A written complaint for submission of documents to the person under consideration (a list No. 8);

1. According to evidence, C, a third party, who was the victim, was removed from an auction protocol, an auction list, a seizure protocol, a seizure list of corporeal movables [the evidence reveals the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s “prefabricated-type building” in the judgment held by the victim having property value, is removed; and (b) C is removed from the auction protocol; and (c) C is removed and removed.

It is clear that it is an act that steals another's property.

The "prefabricated-type building" in the judgment is the sale to the victim following the purchase by E through the procedure of the auction of tangible property, and it is difficult to view it as a prefabricated-type real estate even in light of the state of the prefabricated-type structure.

After being delegated with the legal affairs pertaining to the removal of the above ground water (such as plastic houses and prefabricated buildings in its holding) from the owner of the land located in the “prefabricated-type building”, the Defendant’s civil execution procedure conducted after being delegated with the legal affairs pertaining to the removal of the above ground water (such as plastic houses and prefabricated-type buildings in its holding) and the land delivery lawsuit was not attributable to the inconsistency between the current state of the enforcement object and the executive authority, the Defendant directly committed the act as stated in its holding

In light of the normative meaning and the fact that the defendant is in the position of a certified judicial scrivener, even if considering these circumstances, the defendant has the intention to obtain unlawful benefit from the defendant.