Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On February 18, 2016, around 07:00, at the front hole of the D gas station located in the Chungcheongbuk-gun C, the Defendant: (a) cut off four rocks, such as a grass wild boar, a confirmation reading, a melting stone, and a tin, on which the market price owned by the victim E at that site cannot be known; (b) the Defendant laid down the stone into the vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each investigation report on the defendant's partial statement E, F, G, and H's respective statutory statements (list 12,22 of evidence);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of 2 copies, such as photographs, respective borrowing certificates, transaction information, damaged photographs, 10 copies of photographs, such as stone per residence marina, E, details of E purchase and transactions, and copies of the detailed statement of transactions;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

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

3. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the allegation is the fact that the Defendant carries four stone-related articles, such as a pool wild boar, a storm, a string, a string, and a string of stone (hereinafter “the instant stone”) on the vehicle at the time and place specified in the facts charged.

However, since the instant stone was purchased by the defendant, the defendant alone owns it jointly with the defendant, and even if it was owned by the sole owner of the victim, the defendant would bring about the recognition that the instant stone was jointly owned by the victim according to the partnership with the victim. Therefore, there was no intention to commit a theft.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly examined by the court, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant brought the instant stone owned by the victim with the intent to commit a theft.

The defendant and defense counsel are not accepted.

A. The instant stone shall be deemed to be the object owned by the victim alone.

(1) The Defendant stated at the investigative agency to the following effect:

In other words, the defendant and the victim are in the same trade relationship.