The sentence against the accused shall be determined by a fine of one million won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Punishment of the crime

On October 08, 2018, at around 17:47, the Defendant visited Seocheon-si B and 1st floor C, and then acquired the same day as he returned, even though D did not return the crepit in a situation in which his employees had no mind in response to the other customers’ response, the Defendant demanded a refund as if he returned the crepit, thereby allowing D to transfer KRW 5.90,000 to E under the name of the Defendant’s account.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol of partial examination of the accused;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. E statements;

1. A report on investigation (booming business of bus booms) and photographic images of the CCTV images attached thereto;

1. Investigation report (matters concerning sources of damage);

1. Investigation report (verification of the amount of damage);

1. On-site CCTV investigations;

1. Reporting on internal investigation (verification of data on internal investigation);

1. Report on occurrence of a theft;

1. On-site photographs [the fact that the Defendant visited the store in this case at around 17:35 at the time that he returned the coffee machine to the investigative agency on the day of crime was sufficiently proven by the CCTV images installed around the store in this case and by the bus boom images standing on the road adjacent to the store in this case at the time that the Defendant did not return the coffee machine to the store in this case.

Although the Defendant made a statement in this court to the effect that he returned coffees to other time periods, the above legal statement was made for the first time for the purchase of coffees, the second time for the return and refund of coffees, and the third time for the return and refund of coffees, etc., that he visited all of the instant stores on the day of the instant crime, such as visiting the victim who did not have any coffees, in exchange for the third time, cannot be compatible with the Defendant’s consistent statement that he visited all of the instant stores on the day of the instant crime, and it seems that he left the instant store without having received refund from the Defendant’s attitude.