A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On March 7, 2016, the Defendant: (a) operated a C taxi on March 7, 2016; and (b) embezzled the idea that he/she had, without following necessary procedures, he/she found and found the victim D, who fell from the said cab on the back seat at the market price of KRW 800,000,000,000, jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug jug

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of statutes on records of seizure and lists of seizure;

1. Relevant Article 360 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 360 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is that the Defendant’s mistake is divided and the damaged things are returned to the victim. However, considering the fact that a mobile phone-related crime that is highly likely to engage in subsequent criminal acts using personal information is committed, and that a driver finds the mobile phone of the passenger who gets on a taxi, he/she attempted to dispose of the mobile phone as a stolen object contrary to the passenger’s trust, thereby going against the notification that the driver would return it.

Furthermore, the defendant is also in line with the summary order notified twice due to the crime of similar contents in the past.

Therefore, the defendant needs to be sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with labor heavier than the fine requested by the summary order and to prevent recidivism. Therefore, the sentence shall be determined as per the order.