logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 의성지원 2016.02.04 2015고정70
절도등
Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 3, 2015, at around 11:30, the Defendant: (a) displayed a key on the victim C-owned Dunstun vehicle, which was parked in the enclosed Park in the Dobong-Eup Island located in Seongbuk-do, and (b) stolen the said vehicle.

2. The Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) driven the said rocketing car without a driver’s license at the time and place specified in paragraph 1.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness C and E;

1. A report on investigation (in cases of the field and suspect's residence photographs and black images), theft photographs and images;

1. The ledger of driver's licenses (the defendant and his defense counsel did not appear to mean "the intention of unlawful acquisition" because they used a shot car temporarily and brought to the intention of returning the shot car with respect to the theft of vehicles.

The argument is asserted.

It is called an intention of unlawful acquisition necessary for the establishment of larceny.

The term "right holder" means a person's intention to use or dispose of another person's goods as his own property, and it is not required to hold the economic interest of the goods permanently, and even in the case of deprivation of another person's possession for the purpose of temporary use, it shall not be deemed to be a case of temporary use where it is occupied for a considerably long time without the intention to return it, or where it is abandoned at a place other than its original place (see Supreme Court Decision 88Do917, Sept. 13, 198). In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the above evidence, the defendant did not intend to return the victim's rocketing car.

The decision is judged.

① Since the Defendant and the victim did not know at all before the instant case, the Defendant did not have any way to contact the victim to return the vehicle.

(2) The defendant left his belongings at the place of crime.

arrow