As to the crime No. 1 in the judgment of the defendant, a fine of one million won and a fine of one million won for each crime of No. 2 in the judgment of the court.

Punishment of the crime

On May 31, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny in the Suwon District Court's Sung-nam Branch, and the above judgment was finalized on October 26, 2012, and on February 6, 2014, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced six months of imprisonment with prison labor for larceny and became final and conclusive on February 14, 2014.

1. On October 11, 2012, the fraud Defendant: (a) around 11:00, the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu New Distribution of Goods in the Seocho-gu Seoul High Bus Terminal; (b) did not keep the goods in the custody of the goods; (c) on the other hand, the Defendant reported that the goods were stored in the storage of the goods; and (d) the victim B, the manager of the storage box, “it was stored in the storage of the goods; (b) opened the goods in the storage of the goods; (c) caused the loss of the keys; and (d) received the delivery of one set of Nowon-gu, the market price of the goods stored in the storage from the above B.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.

2. Embezzlements of lost possession;

A. On July 16, 2013, the Defendant, around 16:00, found one resident registration certificate owned by the victim C, which was lost before the 19-3 subway No. 7 of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 19-3 subway No. 19-3 subway No. 7, and one copy of the market price, which includes one transportation card.

The Defendant did not take necessary procedures, such as returning the acquired property to the victim, but did so.

B. On January 3, 2014, around 17:30, the Defendant acquired one 2.80,000 won of the market price, which includes one resident registration certificate owned by the victim D, at the first floor of the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Distribution Office on the 19-5 centth floor.

The Defendant did not take necessary procedures, such as returning the acquired property to the victim, but did so.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property that has been separated from the possession of the victim two times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements in D, C, and B;

1. The police;