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

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in sales of precious metals with the trade name of "C" in Daegu Dong-gu B.

1. On June 13, 2013, around 13:00, the Defendant purchased one black Jinju, which was the victim’s name that he stolen from D, from the above location, one, one black Jinju, one red fluor, one gold fluor, one yellow fluor, one yellow fluor, and one yellow fluor.

In such cases, the defendant, who is engaged in the sales business of precious metals, has a duty of care to verify whether he/she is stolen by ascertaining his/her personal information, etc., and by properly examining the details of acquisition of the Ban, etc., the motive for sale, and the price suitable for the transaction price.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected such care and did not verify the identity of D, and acquired the stolen goods free of charge from D, by negligence, which neglected to make a judgment on the stolen goods, and by negligence, the reflector, etc. were to be discarded as a fake defect.

Ultimately, the Defendant acquired stolen goods by occupational negligence as above.

2. At around 15:00 to 16:00 on June 2013, the Defendant: (a) purchased one half of the curbbins hinginged by the victim, which he stolen from D at the above place.

In such cases, the defendant, who is engaged in the sales business of precious metals, has a duty of care to verify whether he/she is stolen by ascertaining his/her personal information, etc., and by properly examining the details of his/her acquisition, the motive for sale, and the price suitable for the transaction price.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected such care and did not verify the identity of D, and instead neglected the judgment on the stolen goods, and acquired the stolen goods free of charge from D, which caused the Defendant to abandon the defect as a fake price.

Ultimately, the Defendant acquired stolen goods by occupational negligence as above.

3. The Defendant’s ranked around 14:00 to 15:00 on June 2013.