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 30, 2016, the Defendant arbitrarily removed four CCTVs equivalent to KRW 1.2 million at the market price of the above branch office located in the meeting room, which was established in the above branch office and the meeting room, when the candidate who had been supported by him in the election of the head of the branch office in the above branch office in the Nam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul. In addition, the Defendant arbitrarily removed four CCTVs equivalent to KRW 1.2 million from the market price of the above branch office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Documents to be submitted by the complainant, such as a certificate of contents (the defendant was temporarily holding CCTVs in order to take over them in question, and there was no intention to acquire them illegally;

The argument is asserted.

① However, even after examining the evidence, there seems to be no reason for the Defendant to remove CCTVs.

② In addition, the Defendant had the above CCTV for a long time (not less than 10 months), and did not comply with the victim’s request for return.

Comprehensively taking account of these circumstances, there was a defendant's intent to obtain unlawful profits.

must be viewed.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. It is not deemed that the Defendant committed the instant crime with the purpose of taking personal benefits in sentencing Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

After all, all the damaged goods were returned.

However, even though the facts constituting the crime are obvious, the defendant is consistent with the defense that cannot be understood, and does not reflect his mistake.

There was no agreement with the victim.

In addition to this, the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances of crime, and circumstances revealed in the trial process shall be determined as follows.