beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
Reasons
1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below found the Defendant not guilty on the ground that there is room to view the ginseng as owned by the victim C even though the fact was sufficiently recognized as owned by the victim of the ginseng in this case, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged is that the cultivator of the ginseng field of approximately 23,830 square meters, such as Chungcheong-gun D, etc. cultivated by the victim C, was in the name of the Defendant’s wife, and the Defendant was willing to dispose of the ginseng with five-year old root ginseng in the market value equivalent to KRW 300,000,000, which was planted in the above ginseng field.
On July 23, 2012, the Defendant entered into a contract to sell all of the ginseng in the instant ginseng field after receiving KRW 1,40,000,00 from G to G, which is mistaken for the Defendant to have the ownership of the said ginseng in the mid-term office operated by the Defendant, within the mid-term office operated by the Defendant, and subsequently, he stolen the said ginseng owned by the Defendant by having G ggnish the said ginseng from that time to July 26, 2012.
B. According to the records, the court below's decision 1) acknowledged that C's own expenses paid the difference between the ginseng field of this case (land owner and lessor H's 2009 part of the 2009 part, expenses for human resources, pesticide charges, electricity charges, etc., the Defendant's wife cultivated the ginseng of this case, and the Defendant's report to Chungcheongnam-Nam ginseng farmer as the cultivator of the ginseng field of this case, and as its members join it, C paid KRW 600,000 of the investment amount. The Defendant owned the ginseng cultivated from the ginseng field of this case as the Defendant's own expenses, and the Defendant failed to present specific data on the use price of heavy equipment or ginseng management contract to be received from C for the reasons why C came to own at his own expense. In light of these circumstances, the Defendant's judgment of this case is justified.