(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.06.07 2017고단529

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.06.07 2017고단529

절도

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On January 5, 2017, the Defendant: (a) opened a door that is not corrected by the F Ethmp car parked by the victim E (V, 56 years old) at a parking lot located adjacent to the D located adjacent to Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu; (b) around 03:16 on January 5, 2017; and (c) removed one wall containing cash 318,000 won, gift certificates 315,000 won, Samsung card, etc., located in the storage space created by the driver’s seat even.

They go back.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property.

2. In light of the fact that the Defendant consistently and consistently denied the instant facts charged from the police to the present court (the Defendant, in the first interrogation protocol prepared by the police, stated to the effect that he carried out goods from a vehicle parked on the date, time, and place of the instant facts charged, the Defendant stated that he did not take away the wall of the instant facts charged, and that the Defendant could not exclude the possibility that money may be stolen from several other vehicles and vain, the Defendant led to the confession of the instant facts charged by the said statement.

We can not see that there is no reason to do so.

First, it is insufficient to recognize the facts charged of the instant case on the ground that the witness E’s testimony in this court, the police statement of E, and the written statement of E, which seem to correspond to the facts charged of the instant case, parked a car left to the place of the instant facts charged at around 17:30, 17:30, the day immediately preceding the facts charged of the instant case, and they knew that there was no lock on the next day.

Next, according to the two CDs for CCTV storage, and each image of the CCTV images taken at the scene of the crime, the Defendant entered the area near the instant facts charged, and even if the Defendant was found to have caused the son to her hand, the fact that the Defendant committed the crime of the instant facts charged is deemed to have committed the instant facts charged.

It is insufficient to conclude it.

The defendant's power, the CCTV video storage CD mentioned above.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2015.03.13 2014고단2277

-울산지방법원 2017.11.10 2017노753

-부산지방법원 2016.02.17 2014노4601

-인천지방법원 2017.05.19 2017고정422

-서울동부지방법원 2013.07.25 2013노647