logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 원주지원 2015.06.16 2014고단1067
특수절도미수
Text

Defendants are not guilty.

Reasons

1. On October 7, 2014, around 12:30, the Defendants of the facts charged came to fall under the king where there is a standard tree owned by the victim F (hereinafter “instant standard tree”). Defendant B, in advance, with a 5-meter operation salary between the length of preparation, came up with the standard, and Defendant A was found to fall short of the standard of KRW 50,00,000 in the market value by means of the Korea Security Department, and Defendant A was discovered to G, which was contained about approximately 20 kmg of the market value.

As a result, the Defendants jointly attempted to steal the victim's property and attempted to commit it.

2. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by this court.

H sold the standard tree of this case to I on February 2, 2013, but terminated the above sales contract on June 7, 2014, and again sold the standard tree to F.

At the time, F purchased the standard tree for the purpose of punishment.

Since then, G leased the standard tree from H to the mediation of J, the purpose of G’s lease was to recover the standard.

Defendant

A around August 2014, around 2014, I asked I about whether the standard is recovered from the standard tree of this case.

In this regard, I confirmed that “The owner of the standard tree of this case is F, and will ask F to ask the intention and inform it.”

Since then, I asked F to whether or not the standard of this case is recovered from the standard tree, and F confirmed that “B is interested only in the punishment of the standard tree of this case, so the standard of the standard is recovered and is not superior.”

However, I did not again deliver the F's answer to Defendant A.

The Defendants recovered the standard without confirming the intention of F, the owner of the standard tree of this case, and this G reported the Defendants to the police.

Judgment

Since theft is committed against the victim's will with his/her own property, if the victim has understood in advance about the act of taking property, that act shall be committed by the victim.

arrow