logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.10.26 2018고정620
절도
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 26, 2018, around 15:00, the Defendant appears to be a clerical error in the Seodaemun-gu Seoul Building, Seoul, the Defendant’s “big fact” as stated in the written indictment of only the 600,000 won of the market price set aside by the victim D (23 tax) in order to park a motor vehicle by the victim D (23 tax) in front of the Seodaemun-gu Seoul Building, Seoul.

In addition, the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted the following purport: (a) the Defendant and his defense counsel recognized and brought about as a burner material under the supervision of the Jeonbro, which caused damage to the Defendant; and (b) the Defendant had no intention to acquire it by intentionally or unlawfully, on the ground that he had no intention to acquire it.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, i.e., ① the victim was gleeped in a telephone call with a person related to the prosecution, and was able to have known that the victim was not a person who had been gleeped.

The statement, ② in glag and bag, various living goods, such as clothes, electronic equipment, cosmetics, flags, etc. were contained, and the state of some goods, such as white bags, were considerably good. The Defendant opened a glag and confirmed the contents thereof. ③ The Defendant asked the merchant of the truck next to the bag to ask the bag, whether the damaged goods were the goods.

In full view of the fact that the Defendant appears to have been aware of the possibility that the capital, etc. was not abandoned at the time, the Defendant’s intentional act on the Defendant’s theft of another’s property was at least dolusent.

The intention of illegal acquisition can also be recognized.

Defendant

【Defense Counsel’s argument without merit.】

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of seizure records and statutes concerning the list of seizure;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The order of provisional payment;

arrow