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

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 22, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around December 22, 2014, at the Cheongju-si, posted two copies of the computer owned by the victim D and 2,000 documents related to school operation in the F Hegel's vehicle owned by the Defendant in the E-school administrative office attached to D, which was located on his book in the petition-gu, Cheongju-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and H;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. A written confirmation of the facts of I;

1. Certificates of non-profit private organizations;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on reported matters;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the confinement in the workhouse [the Defendant] asserts that he/she has possession of the goods as indicated in its reasoning, or that he/she has ownership therein, and that he/she is innocent. The theft means the possessor’s possession of the goods in his/her possession against others and the transfer of the goods to him/herself or a third party’s possession. Whether a certain goods are under the possession of a third party is under the possession of a third party shall be determined by considering the intention of control as a subjective element other than the scope of management or the possibility of factual management as an objective element, and ultimately, a normative determination should be made in light of social norms, depending on the shape of the goods in question and other specific circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do3252, Jul. 10, 2008). The Defendant prepared a letter of confirmation that all the goods in the place where the goods are located exist, including a lease contract signed and sealed by G, and the fact that the Defendant had obtained the aforementioned authorization from E school.