Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On June 10, 2017, at around 01:30, the Defendant: (a) stolen a bicycle with a single bicycle amounting to KRW 700,00,000 at the victim’s market value, which is the victim’s possession, installed in the front of the “D” restaurant located in C, without a correction device by the victim E.

Summary of Evidence

Part of the statement concerning the police interrogation protocol against the defendant;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the occurrence of reports (thief images investigation and search) on the investigation of the E’s written statement, photographs of the scene, photographs of the crime, and photographs of the recovered damaged articles;

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

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

1. The sentencing conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Procedure Act, based on the following factors: (a) of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is a reasonable contingent crime for sentencing; (b) the stolen bicycle’s bicycle was returned to the injured party; and (c) the injured party was not willing to be punished; and (d) other factors constituting the sentencing conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act are comprehensively taken into account.

The acquittal portion

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who operates a “G” as a sports product wholesale and retail company from the 6th floor of the F-ro 602 of the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F.

Around May 2010, the Defendant, at the above “G office,” had a victim H, “When operating an agency for camping goods imported and sold in Japan, at least 20% of the distribution margin may remain.”

The agency contract is concluded, and the amount of KRW 60 million is deposited in the first price, and the goods will be supplied on the face of the week.

“The phrase “ was false.”

However, the Defendant was unable to pay 30,40,000 won to workers I of the above “G” from March 2010 to May 2010, and even if the Defendant was unable to pay investment proceeds to KRW 50,000,000 from other investors of the above “G”, it can be able to appropriately supply tools corresponding thereto even if he was paid the said amount from the injured party in advance.