A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On April 8, 2016, the Defendant acquiring goods from the head of the office and office had a duty of care to verify whether the Defendant, who is engaged in sales of precious metals, purchased 3C counters (in this case, where the Defendant was engaged in sales of precious metals) at the “D” operated by the Defendant (D) in Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, and 209, the Defendant purchased the victim’s 3,446,00 won or 3C counters (the overlapping counters) at the market price owned by the Defendant, who was the customer, from the customer E.

Nevertheless, the defendant acquired stolen goods by negligence in the course of business after purchasing at KRW 300,000, as shown in attached Table No. 3, as well as at KRW 300,000, while neglecting the above duty of care and neglecting the judgment on the stolen goods.

2. At around 10:50 on April 12, 2016, the Defendant purchased stolen goods at a gold exchange as described in paragraph (1) operated by the Defendant, even though he/she was aware of the fact that he/she was a 14,700,000 won of the market price of 14,70,000 won, which is the victim F of the Defendant, or a 1,100,000 won of 1,000 won of 1,10,000 won of 2,10,000 won of 2,10,000 won of 2,00 from the end of May 2016, the Defendant acquired stolen goods at least nine times in total as described in paragraphs (1), (2), (4) through (11), (5), and (16) of the attached List of Crimes (Provided, That each “saching” listed in the attached Table of Crimes is a producer or a producer.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of each police officer against the defendant or E;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. The complaint, photograph, site, remittance details, and purchase [the defendant and the defense counsel denied that there is no negligence as to the crime of acquiring water from the head of the superior division of the task as indicated in the judgment, but the following circumstances, i.e., the defendant already purchased gold papers from E several times, and E re-markets.