logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2013.09.27 2013고정743
절도
Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 26, 2013, at around 01:30, the Defendant discovered one unit of Dbesf2 Scooter equivalent to KRW 1.5 million at the market price owned by the victim C, which was parked in the parking lot located in Dong-gu, Nam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, and then cut approximately 15 meters up to Dong-gu B.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written statement prepared in C;

1. Report on occurrence of a theft;

1. All on-site photographs and damaged objects;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the same Act concerning the crime, selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. At the time of the summary of the claim, the defendant had the intention to destroy, but did not have the intention to larceny.

2. In the case of larceny, the intent of unlawful acquisition may be recognized by deeming that there exists an intent to infringe on the ownership or principal right in the case of larceny, even if the intent to permanently hold the economic benefit of the object is not required, that is, the intent to acquire only the value of the substance or the substance equivalent thereto is to acquire the ownership or principal right. In the case of using another person's property without the consent of the possessor, if the use of the property is so consumed to a considerable extent of the economic value of the property itself, or if the property is used without the consent of the possessor at other places than the original one, or it is in possession of the property for a long time without the return, then the use of the property is consumed to a considerable extent, or it is in excess of the original one (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do7819, Mar. 9, 206). According to the aforementioned evidence, the Defendant moved the scooter in his own place outside the victim's parking lot, and the Defendant moved the above scoo near the road.

arrow