logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 진주지원 2021.03.25 2020고정5
절도
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the owner of the building B in Jinju and the victim C was residing in the above Ba D.

On July 5, 2019, at around 13:30, the Defendant: (a) stolen the Defendant, on the ground that the victim was unable to comply with the Defendant’s demand that he left the cooling house before the door while leaving the cooling house; (b) the victim was carrying the 400,000 won of the market price, which is the victim’s possession, on the truck.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of the witness C and some of the witness E (F before the opening of each name);

1. Each police statement protocol against C and E;

1. 112 Reported case management lists, on-sites, and photographs of damaged objects;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the accused and the defense counsel, who compared the investigation report (investigation into calculation of the amount of damage), and the high-priced price among the damaged goods

1. The main point of the argument is that the victim did not comply with the victim's request several times, even though the defendant neglected the victim's right to use his/her hallway without permission for a long time.

Therefore, the Defendant requested to E to have the victim keep the cooling house until the victim was found, and thus, the Defendant had the Defendant had the intention of larceny and the intention of unlawful acquisition.

It is difficult to see it.

2. The intention of unlawful acquisition necessary to establish the crime of larceny;

The term "right holder" means the intention to use or dispose of another person's goods as his own property, and the intention to permanently hold the economic interest of the goods is not required, and even if the possession of another person is deprived for the purpose of temporary use, it shall not be deemed to be a case of temporary use where it is occupied for a considerable period without the intention to return it, or where it is abandoned at a place other than its original place (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do3465, Sept. 6, 2002). It is acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court.

arrow