beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Criminal facts
1. On March 2015, the Defendant: (a) was stolen by having a 50,00 won of cash owned by the victim, who is away from the next floor while the victim under the influence of alcohol, and a thief card (C) on the market price in which the victim was diving at the 2nd floor located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul. Around the beginning of the new wall on March 2015.
The Defendant, including this, stolen the property amounting to KRW 1,393,000 in total on six occasions from March 2015 to June 20, 2015, as shown in attached Table 1.
2. On May 27, 2015, the Defendant: (a) at the event held in front of the 2nd apartment in Geumcheon-gu, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul; (b) the victim D, under the influence of alcohol, was fluencing in front of the 2nd apartment; and (c) the victim D, thereby falling into the event; and (d) the market value of Samsung Ggalle, which is equivalent to KRW 1,107,000, 1 unit of the 4nd cellular phone.
The Defendant did not take necessary procedures, such as returning the acquired mobile phone device to the victim, but did so.
Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property that has been separated from the possession of the victim.
3. Fraud and the Defendant in violation of the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act purchased on June 13, 2015 at the “F convenience store” located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul, one of the 1,000 won market price, and the Defendant took place as if the Defendant was the genuine holder of the national credit card (H) in the name of G, and presented the said credit card to the victim due to lack of name.
However, the above credit card was stolen by an offense with the same contents as the No. 1 No. 5 of the crime sight table in paragraph (1). The defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the price normally even if he was provided with the above goods by the victim.
Nevertheless, the defendant obtained from the victim who was accused of the above act, i.e., a humcop from the seat, and acquired it by fraud.