logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.09.18 2014고정3684
업무상과실장물취득
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, each of them is 100.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A is a person engaged in sales of precious metals in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “D”.

At around 14:00 on April 25, 2014, the Defendant purchased four gold bars, four galbs, one earbs, ten earbs, and ten galbs, each of which he stolen from E, and three galbs from around 14:00 on April 26, 201, respectively.

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 the personal information of E, etc., while checking the details of acquisition, such as gold bullion, motive for sale, and the price suitable for the transaction price.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while neglecting such care and presenting another person’s identification card, neglected to judge whether he or she is a photograph of his or her identification card and the face of his or her defendant, etc., and purchased the above gold Bans in 1,218,000, 1,800,000 by negligence.

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

2. Defendant B is a person engaged in sales of precious metals with the trade name called “G” in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 1nd floor of 1 Jongno-gu.

At around 23:30 on January 17, 2014, the Defendant purchased two gold Bans from the upper bank to which it is impossible to identify the market price that he stolen from E, and two gold Bans around 14:00 on February 12, 2014, respectively.

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

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected the above care and did not confirm the identification card of E, and did not record the details of purchase in the account book.

arrow