(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.2.15. 선고 2018고합390 판결

The Defendant purchased the “Criju station located in Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-do,” adjacent to the point where B’s pipelines are laid underground, and sold the land and sold the land, and installed a facility for drilling the hole on the oil pipelines to steals the petroleum managed by the said Corporation.

(a) Installation of gambling facilities;

From March 2017 to May 2017, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with E, which operated the gas station, and installed two joints of bricks and high voltages with the oil pipelines buried near the gas station. Furthermore, the Defendant connected the above high voltages to the oil station at a total of 250 meters to the oil station, and connected them to the storage tank by installing a pressure gauge (a system verifying whether oil oil has been oil oil), weight gauge (a system confirming oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil), powdering (a system identifying oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil oil), and installing a storage tank. Accordingly, the Defendant installed facilities to steal oil pipelines managed by the said Corporation.

(b) Petroleum theft using gas facilities;

The Defendant: (a) had F, who did not proceed as scheduled, leased the above gas station to F, and (b) had F, use the gas station with F to steal petroleum; and (c) had F, leased the above gas station.

From the end of May 2017 to August 30, 2017, the Defendant, along with F, deducted from F petroleum 81,00 liters from the market price of KRW 39,66,00 of the market price of the victim G Co., Ltd. owned by the said Corporation, including gasoline of KRW 30,00,00, which is equivalent to KRW 55,947,000 in the market price of KRW 51,00,00 in total, by moving oil transported from oil pipelines into the oil pipelines by opening a valve connected from the oil pipelines through the oil pipelines using oil facilities installed as above. Accordingly, the Defendant stolen petroleum owned by the victim G Co., Ltd. by using the oil pipelines installed in collusion with F.

2. Violation of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act relating to “H oil stations”

On March 2, 2018, the Defendant conspired to steal petroleum by drilling and high voltages connected to the oil pipelines managed by B located near H oil stations in the area of the oil station located around the Seocho-nam War I on March 2, 2018.

From March 2018 to March 2, 2018, the Defendant, along with his name-free boxes, 2: (a) around H’s oil station; (b) around H’s oil station; (c) one person sees the network with the telescope; and (d) other two persons, using equipment, such as insertings, gros, pits, hos, gars, and glags, have engaged in 3 meters in depth, 3 meters in length, and 4 meters in width; (d) however, the Defendant was arrested to the police for committing the crime described in the foregoing paragraph (1).

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with two infinites, tried to install facilities to steal oil on the oil pipelines, but failed to commit such act.

“2018, 800

On March 10, 2017, the Defendant sentenced K, L, and M (K to five years of imprisonment at the Daegu District Court on December 15, 2016) to five years of suspended execution, L was sentenced to three years of suspended execution at the Daegu District Court on June 17, 2016. M was sentenced to three years of imprisonment at the Daegu District Court on June 17, 2016, and was sentenced to three years of suspended execution (three years of suspended execution at the Daegu District Court on July 8, 2016), N (S was sentenced to three years of suspended execution at the Daegu District Court on July 2, 2016) to install a "PP station" in the Daegu District Court on December 12, 2014, the Defendant and his accomplice were to install the above facilities to transport goods to the Oil Pipeline, to maintain the pressure and pressure of oil storage and treatment of oil, and to install the above facilities to connect them with the aforementioned facilities to the Corporation, and to install and maintain the Q2.

1. Installation of gambling facilities;

The Defendant started the construction of the gas station from December 2014 to April 2015, along with K, M, Q, J, and nameless boxes, to start the construction of the gas station from around December 2014 to around January 2015. The Defendant installed a special valve by drilling the hole to the oil pipelines located approximately 200 meters away from the said gas station (round 48 kilometers from the mountain pumps to the Daegu pumphead) and installing a high pressure tank to store the underground oil in the oil station. In preparation for detection, the Defendant installed a sprink, oil pressure gauge, valves, valves, and storage tank to store the gas.

Accordingly, the Defendant installed facilities to steal oil on the oil pipelines in collusion with K, M, Q, J, false name boxes, etc.

2. Theft of petroleum using milk facilities;

According to the aforementioned division of roles with K, M, Q, J, N, L, etc., the Defendant stolen a total of 2,877,130,200 square meters of petroleum (number of gasoline 609,00 liters, light oil 1,891,900 liters, light oil 33,000 liters, mixed oil 33,000 liters, mixed oil 25,60 liters, mixed oil 25,60 liters) holding a total of 68 times as shown in the annexed list of crimes, by taking advantage of facilities installed in the preceding paragraph from around April 9, 2015 to November 26, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

[2018Gohap390]

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of F;

1. Second instance prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of F: 7);

1. A copy of the investigation report (related to overall conditions, such as the installation of a gas station at the time of crackdown), copy of the investigation report (related to the oil pipelines laid underground and the C gas station photographs), copy of the investigation report (related to photographs of the C gas station), the investigation report (H's confirmation of the place of installation of a gas station around the gas station, and the application for ex post facto search, seizure and verification warrant), the investigation report (related to the C gas station's quantity of flow and the fixed amount of sales

1. Photographs and documentary evidence produced at the scene of crimes;

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness M, Q, J, K and N;

1. Copies of each seizure protocol (Nos. 12 to 14 of the evidence list);

1. A copy of an investigation report (in the face of delivering money), a copy of an investigation report (in the face of delivering money), a copy of an application for registration of petroleum selling business, etc., a copy of an investigation report (in the face of an application for registration of petroleum selling business, etc.), a copy of an investigation report (in the face of an underground passage), a copy of an investigation report (in the face of an investigation report), a copy of an investigation report (in the face of an investigation date), a copy of a criminal investigation report (in the face of a regional oil transport date), a copy of an investigation report (in the face of an investigation place), a copy of an investigation report (in the face of an investigation place), a copy of an investigation report (in the face of an investigation site), a copy of an investigation report (in the part of an application for registration of a

1. Submission of each photograph (Evidence Nos. 4. 30. 32), interview photograph, copy of mersh, currency details, average sales price by region, current status of the gas station in the storage of gas stations, written judgments (Evidence No. 60), and B answers;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 13(1)2 of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act ("C gas station"), Article 13(6) and 2 of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act, Article 13(1)2 of the same Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 13(1)2 of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act, Article 30 of the same Act, Article 13(1)2 of the same Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the installation of oil facilities related to the "P gas", the selection of imprisonment), Articles 13-2(1) and 13(1)2 of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (including the theft of oil using the gas station, and each of the gas stations), Article 13-2(1)2 of the same Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37(former part), 38(1)2, and 50 of the Criminal Act (an aggravated punishment and concurrent punishment prescribed in the violation of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act following the installation of oil station related to the "PP station," which is the largest penalty)

1. Dismissal of application for compensation;

Article 32(1)3, and Article 25(3)3 and 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (the existence and scope of liability of the accused is unclear and it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation in criminal proceedings)

[Judgment as to the defendant and defense counsel's assertion of the above evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 through 9 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office 2018, which was seized, is sought to confiscate the evidence No. 1, 2, 4, and 9 of the above evidence No. 1, 48 (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Claims on violations of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act following the theft of oil using oil supply facilities in the case of 2018 Gohap390;

A. Summary of the assertion

Although the Defendant installed oil facilities by drilling the hole on the pipelines buried near the “Cju Oil”, the amount of petroleum that was stolen by using the oil facilities is merely 20,000 to 30,000 liter.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, F, an accomplice, stated that the flow quantity from the second examination of suspect to the court in this court is the total of 30,000 liter per liters and 50,000 liters per day, based on the details of cash withdrawal in the X bank account (Account Number Y) used by the C, and specifically identified the flow amount by day as 81,000 liter as shown in the attached Table (Evidence 2810, 2811). According to the F’s statements, F, in collusion with the objective evidence account, are reliable and reliable, according to F, etc., the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is not acceptable.

2. Claims concerning violations of oil pipeline safety control in cases of 2018Gohap800;

A. Summary of the assertion

The Defendant did not have any participation in the crime of cutting petroleum using K, etc. and oil facilities, or committed the crime of cutting petroleum using gas facilities. However, the Defendant was aware of the fact that K, etc. was stolen by installing a gas facility at the latest around October 2015.

B. Determination

In light of the following facts and circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged in the case 2018Dahap8000, can establish the fact that the Defendant, in collusion with K, etc., installed oil facilities on the oil pipelines managed by K and used oil facilities and stolen petroleum. Thus, this part of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is rejected.

1) In this Court, K, J, Q, and M, all of the co-offenders to the above crimes, made a false statement to the effect that the Defendant was aware that he had been guilty of each of the above crimes, and the Defendant had engaged in the construction of an oil facility, such as cutting the engineers and installing a special valve with a hole on the oil pipeline, and laying a high pressure tank up to the storage tank, etc., or that the Defendant was aware that he had installed a gas facility. Since the above co-offenders had already been convicted of this part of the crime and the judgment became final and conclusive, it does not seem to have made a false statement to the effect that he would be responsible to avoid liability to the Defendant in light of the attitude of the statement in this Court.

2) As seen in the instant case, the crime of installing a facility by drilling a hole on the oil pipelines, attaching a pressure valve and laying a high pressure valve is likely to pose a high level of risk, and is in need of advanced technology. Of the accomplices such as K, there is no person holding such technology among the accomplices. The Defendant appears to have held the technology of installing a gas facility in a similar way as in the instant case around 2017 and around 2018.

3) From October 2014 to March 2015, the Defendant appears to have invested KRW 200 million in and overall engaged in the establishment of “PP gas station” to be responsible for the installation of pipes and storage tanks. In the instant case, high voltages to move stolen petroleum from the oil pipelines connected to the storage tanks buried underground in the gas station, and the crime of theft of petroleum using the oil installed as above began from April 9, 2014, immediately after the completion of the construction of the “P gas station.” As such, the Defendant participated in the installation of the “P gas station immediately before the crime of theft”, in particular in the installation of pipes and storage tanks.

4) Around October 23, 2015, the Defendant stated to the effect that “A worker B, who is the seat of the Defendant, demands K, etc. to pay KRW 100 million by viewing the fact of gambling,” and, under the pretext of delivering it to the said employee, the Defendant was bound to receive KRW 100 million in cash from K. If the Defendant did not have conspired or participated in each of the of the instant crimes and became aware of the accomplice’s criminal acts late around October 2015, the Defendant’s above behavior is difficult to obtain.

1. Reasons for sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than three years nor more than 15 years;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) A violation of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act due to the theft of oil using any oil facility;

[Determination of Punishment] The case of repeatedly committing a crime using special veterinary methods, tools or organizations, all types 2 (property highly worthy of value) [Special Convicts] (Special Convicts]

[Determination of Recommendation Area] Aggravation, 3 years to 6 years

(b) Violation of the Oil Pipeline Safety Control Act due to the installation or attempted installation of oil pipeline facilities: Sentencing standards are not set.

(c) Scope of final recommending punishment based on the standards for handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than three years (the crime for which the sentencing criteria are set and the crime for which no sentencing criteria are set are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, considering only the lower limit of the sentencing range on the crime of violation of the Oil Pipeline Control Act due to the theft of oil using oil facilities for which the sentencing criteria are set

3. Determination of sentence;

The following circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and result of the crime, and various sentencing factors specified in the arguments in the instant case, such as the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as the order.

○○ Unfavorable Normals: Each of the instant crimes committed on the pipelines managed by B, that the Defendant installed or attempted to install special facilities or committed a theft of oil passing through the pipelines in collusion with F, etc. In the course of the crime, there is a risk of causing large-scale accidents, such as explosion of the pipelines or fire, and pollution of surrounding soil due to the leakage of oil due to damage to the pipelines, etc. There are considerable social harm and injury. In the case of 2018 high-priced80, the amount of the oil exceeds 2.8 billion won. The Defendant did not commit the instant crime at least 30 marries 2018 and 800 mar 2000 mar 2050 mar 2015 mar 390 mar 208 mar 208 mar 208 mar 280 mar 2018 mar 208 mar 208 mar 208 mar 390 mar 201.

○ A favorable condition: The Defendant has no record of criminal punishment exceeding the suspended sentence of imprisonment, or of criminal punishment for the same crime. 2018 and 1800 cases led by K, and the Defendant appears to have no significant benefit from the crime. The Defendant’s family members want to take the preference against the Defendant.

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

From the end of May 2017 to August 30, 2017, the Defendant, in collusion with F, used oil pipelines installed in the pipelines located near the 'Cjunan-dong, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu', and stolen the market price of KRW 179,737,790 in an amount equivalent to gasoline of KRW 135,9590 in the market price owned by the Victim G Co., Ltd., and the market price of KRW 329,564,031 in an amount equal to KRW 300,429,301,829 in total, the market price of KRW 509,429,328,328 liter.

2. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a suspicion of guilt against the Defendant, the interest of the Defendant ought to be determined (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2008Do11, Jan. 20, 201).

B. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by this court, ① the total amount of petroleum sales of “C gas station” verified from the end of May 2017 to August 30, 2017, which is the period from the end of the foregoing facts charged, is 58,4231, gasoline 303,959; ② petroleum sales of oil at the oil station normally operated shall be purchased and sold at the petroleum agency, etc. which is officially licensed; ② the total amount of petroleum purchase of the gas station is 30 liter 30 liter 50 liter 30 liter 288,00, 168, 00 liter 30 liter 50 liter 30 liter 50 liter 50 liter 280 liter 30 liter 50 liter 30 liter 50 liter 280 liter 30 liter 480 liter 25 liter 20 liter 20 30

C. However, in light of the following circumstances, it is insufficient to recognize that the facts acknowledged above or the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone constituted a theft of petroleum of 436,382 liter exceeding 81,00 liter stated in the facts constituting the crime, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

1) There is no specific ground to acknowledge that the difference between the above sales amount and the sales amount was caused by the total theft of petroleum.

2) Rather, AA, which had worked as a warden in the Zusancheon in Gyeonggi-do, another gas station operated by F at the time of the above Domination period, stated to the effect that, in accordance with F’s direction, AA paid cash to transactions of petroleum without material in the vicinity of Busan-si, and that some of them were supplied as Cmination. The occurrence of a difference between the amount of petroleum sales and the amount of petroleum purchase in Cmination is likely to be excluded because the petroleum purchased as non-material is included in the foregoing.

3) During the second examination of suspect, F stated that when the Defendant deducted oil from the oil pipeline in the oil pipeline, the Defendant confirmed the remaining amount prior to oil oil tank oil oil oil and delivered the price corresponding to the difference to A in cash by confirming the remaining amount after oil oiling, and stated that the amount corresponding to the difference was determined as 81,000 liter by specifying each day and the amount paid in return for the cash withdrawal on the basis of the cash withdrawal details in the account of the X bank account of the Criju station (Evidence 2018 Gohap520, evidence No. 2810, 2811). In this court, F stated that the degree of flow that the Defendant stated in the prosecutor’s office was specified on the basis of the details of cash withdrawal in the above X bank account. As such, F’s statement on the degree of flow is supported by the content of cash withdrawal in the account of the X bank that was used in the Criju station at the time of the objective material.

4) As seen earlier, while the Defendant stated in the third police interrogation that the difference between the purchase quantity reported to the Institute and the quantity of spoke weather sales was an intentional flow in the third police interrogation, the Defendant stated that he did not know of the accurate flow. The second time of the interrogation of the suspect (Evidence 2018 Gohap390 pages 2541), and the second time of the interrogation of the suspect (Evidence 20,000 to 30,000 liter, and the frequency of flow in this court, are seven times, and the Defendant appears to have not been involved in the operation of the Criju station during the above period. As such, the Defendant’s statement at the time of the third police interrogation of the suspect appears to have been made by a vague trend.

3. Sub-resolution:

Thus, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime, and thus, it should be pronounced not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, inasmuch as the facts charged within the scope of the above facts charged

Judges

The presiding judge, judges and assistant judges

Judges Park Jong-ro

Judges Park Jae-gu

Note tin

1) The facts charged according to facts obtained through the examination of evidence to the extent that the defendant does not substantially disadvantage the defendant's exercise of his/her right to

Some revisions were made.

2) As seen below, the Defendant’s total quantity of petroleum that was stolen in collusion with F can be recognized as 81,000, but the flow and pipes by type of oil.

In order to be favorable to the defendant, it shall be recognized as specific to 30,00 gasoline, light oil 51,000, respectively.

3) The investigative agency shall provide for the accused with the consideration of the fluctuation of the market price of the petroleum every day (the purchase volume and inventory of the petroleum at the gas station).

Gasoline 1, i.e. gasoline 1, which can be verified through a calculation system used to process high quantities, sales status, etc.

The market price of petroleum has been calculated by applying 1,322 won per 1 liter and 1,097 won per 1 liter (2018 Gohap390, evidence records 2584) and the amount of flow above.

The market price of petroleum calculated by applying the above price to the above price (30,000 gasoline, 51,000) shall be 39,660,000 won (=30,000 x)

1,322 won, transit 55,947,00 won (i.e., 51,00 literx 1,097 won) totaling 95,607,000 won. However, this is paid by F in return for milk to the Defendant.

(111,050,000 on the above list, which is one money. However, since the calculation method of the investigative agency is more favorable to the defendant, the calculation method of the investigative agency shall be more favorable to the defendant.

Pursuant to food, the market price of petroleum shall be 39,660,00 won in total, 55,947,000 won in total, 95,607,000 won in total.

4) Since 'V' corporation as stated in the indictment changed its trade name to T stock company (T) on January 1, 201, 'V' corporation is corrected as above.

5) Since the name in the corporate register of WW Co., Ltd. stated in the indictment is U.S., it shall be corrected as above.

6) The indictment is written in KRW 2,887,130,200, but it appears to be a clear clerical error (in investigation records 1573), and the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense.

Since there seems to be no substantial disadvantage, it shall be corrected ex officio.

7) 2018 Gohap520 Pre-Evidence 41