logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2015.02.06 2012고단1451
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant, along with C, D, and E, stolen credit cards from the wallets of the victims who use the department store by retailing them to withdraw cash with such stolen credit cards or to purchase high visibility and clothing, etc.; (b) on March 29, 2003, at G department stores with the fourth floor H female clothes store in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, C, D, and E to see or wind; and (c) the Defendant, at the hand room of another victim, stolen test color bars by taking away the gap in monitoring and neglecting by the victim I to purchase goods.

On March 17, 2003, from around 15:48 to April 4, 2003, the Defendant, together with E, D, and C, stolen the items owned by the victims habitually over 11 times, such as the list of crimes in the attached Form.

2. Although there is a statement in each investigation agency of C and D as evidence that seems to correspond to the above facts charged, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, it is difficult to believe all of the facts charged, and CCTV photographs alone are insufficient to recognize the facts charged, and there is no other evidence.

1. C and D have committed retail-making crimes for a long time.

It is difficult to understand that it is easy for persons who have committed daily crimes to be aware of their memory specifically until the date, time, place, and details of the crime with regard to the crime for ten years.

② The statements made by C and D concerning the role of the defendant, the method of crime, etc. are contradictory to each other.

In addition, with respect to the crime No. 5 of the crime list No. 5, C stated that “A has been admitted to a cosponisco store in the form of wife, and A has been admitted to that cospon store,” but the Defendant was not a member of the cospon store in around 2003.

(3) The Defendant, around 199, has opened and run a Lestop in 199, as a business entity.

arrow