Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On April 10, 2017, around 20:03, the Defendant: (a) committed a theft with 5 mobile phones equivalent to one million won at the victim’s market price owned by the victim E, which he/she opened on the side of the restaurant, by using the gaps where he/she neglected to pay meals to the victim E, in the “D” restaurant located in Sungnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Sungnam-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of witness E in the third public trial protocol;

1. Partial statement concerning the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant by the prosecution;

1. A criminal investigation report (additional investigation of CCTV images) and a criminal investigation report (the confirmation of CCTV CCTV in a F apartment which is a suspect's residence);

1. Photographss and CCTV images by capturing on-site CCTV images;

1. The results of appraisal by the Supreme Prosecutors' Office digital sirens center (including CD screen images) (the defendant and his defense counsel denies the crime) will be examined.

In a criminal trial, the formation of a conviction shall not necessarily be based on direct evidence, but on indirect evidence, the indirect evidence shall not be individually or separately assessed, and the indirect evidence shall not be assessed individually or separately, and shall be assessed comprehensively by mutual relation with each other in all respects, and shall undergo a thorough and contradictory argument.

In addition, the probative value of evidence is left to the discretion of a judge, but the judgment should be consistent with logical and empirical rules, and the degree of the formation of a conviction to be found guilty in a criminal trial should be such that there is no reasonable doubt, but to the extent that it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence which is recognized as having probative value is not allowed as exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

The reasonable doubt here refers to the probability of facts that cannot be compatible with the facts in accordance with logical and empirical rules, not including all questions and irregularities.