The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the facts charged [criminal record] The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a special larceny at the Seoul Central District Court on September 11, 1997; imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months; imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny) at the Seoul Northern District Court on August 10, 199; imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years and six months; imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime at the Seoul Central District Court on April 25, 2002 at the same court on July 5, 2005; and imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years and six years and six months at the Seoul Northern District Court on August 25, 2009 at the Seoul Northern District Court on November 18, 2012.

【Criminal Facts】

On December 25, 2012, at around 00:13, the Defendant: (a) discovered the victim D, who was under the influence of alcohol, and was in the influence of alcohol on the platform of subway No. 4, the subway No. 8-2, located in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Saro 2, to steal money and valuables against the passengers; and (b) found the victim D, who was under the influence of alcohol, and the victim’s possession of the victim, was in the color of 450,00 won in cash, cash, 40,000 won in the market price of the victim’s household; (c) one resident registration certificate; and (d) one bank check card; and (e) one bank blick card; (e) 30,000 won in the market price.

As a result, the Defendant habitually stolen the property worth 520,000 won in total, which is the market value owned by the victim.

2. Determination

A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant had never been on the subway No. 4’s platform of the subway No. 8-2, and there was no theft of the victim’s wall wall inside the victim’s bank.

B. In a judgment, the facts constituting an offense ought to be established based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads to a judge to have such convictions as to the extent that there is no room for a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such convictions are to be ensured, it is doubtful that the Defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable.