The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On March 2015, the Defendant: (a) committed theft by entering the victim D’s house located in the Hacheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do; (b) one Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom, 88 Memorial Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom; and (c) one Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom Dom

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the fact that the Defendant brought about the instant gambling, etc. owned by the victim while on March 2015, 2015, when the Defendant was on the victim’s house.

However, in full view of the following circumstances recognized by the above evidence, it cannot be readily concluded that the defendant had the criminal intent of theft and brought about the escape of this case against the victim's will.

1) In light of the following circumstances, the statement to the effect that the victim came to know of the theft of the instant intentionality, etc. around March 24, 2015 cannot be recognized as credibility.

A) On March 2015, 2015, the victim visited the police box and filed a report on his/her own theft. The police officer E visited the victim’s house at the time to verify the reported details. “The victim was stolen of his/her high level.”

was done.

It is not always necessary to keep high-priced goods in a marina, not a means of action, so it is required to specify the exact contents such as the characteristics of the goods.

However, the victim did not clearly state the content of the damaged product.

The victim did not receive the case by guiding the victim to re-report if the contents of the damage are clearly confirmed later, but there was no further fact that the victim reported again.

“The statement was made”.

The police officers F, which confirmed the content of damage with E at the time, also asked the victim's own characteristics, etc. to determine where the victim purchased the source. However, the victim's statement alone is not enough to protect the victim's own characteristics.