The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On February 11, 2015, the Defendant is a person who was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the Daejeon District Court on February 11, 2015 and is currently under trial at the above court.

On February 4, 2015, the Defendant, at the Jung-gu Culture Complex of Daejeon on February 11, 2015, knew that the victim C (Nam and 69 years of age) would sell real estate in Seocheon-si owned jointly with D, etc., and moved the victim to the E judicial scrivener office located in Seocheon-si, where he/she drives, with the knowledge that the victim C (Nam and 69 years of age) would sell real estate in Seocheon-si owned jointly with D.

At around 16:00 on the same day, the defendant, at the above certified judicial scrivener office, received KRW 8 million in cash as down payment, and again started with Daejeon, who is on the back seat of the defendant's car operation.

At around 22:00 on the same day, the Defendant stopped the said car next to the cultural development bridge located in the Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, and thereafter, plucked up the arms of the victim seated on the back of the early bucking, thereby making it impossible to resist by the victim, and forced the victim to leave the arms of the victim containing 8 million won in cash owned by the victim, and let the victim get out of the train and drive it.

Accordingly, the defendant took 8 million won in cash from the victim.

2. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted the victim on the day of the instant case, while serving the victim on the part of the competent judicial scrivener office located in Seocheon-si, Daejeon at Daejeon, there was a fact that the victim frequently raised 2 hours from the main points located in Daejeon F, and the victim was able to take the victim who met around 23:00 on the same day before the victim’s house, and there was no omission of forcibly taking money from the victim.

3. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on strict evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and thus, makes the judge feel true.