logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.10.17 2019노285
절도
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal argues that the Defendant had a gift certificate in the depository and issued it between documents in the warehouse. However, there was no reasonable ground, and that there was only the Defendant, and that the manager of the warehouse was the person who managed the warehouse, and that the other part-time student was not able to search for the gift certificate even if he entered the warehouse. Thus, it is recognized that the Defendant stolen the gift certificate.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and acquitted.

2. Determination

A. On January 1, 2018, the Defendant: (a) committed a theft by taking a part of a new global merchandise coupon equivalent to KRW 100,000 owned by the victim in the carter, while working at a “DPC” room operated by the victim C in the underground of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Yongsan-gu, as an employee.

B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the following grounds that the instant facts charged constituted a case where there is no proof of crime.

① In light of the fact that the victim’s statement stated that “the Defendant had stated that the gift certificates were transferred to a warehouse, but the gift certificates were not discovered in the warehouse, thus the Defendant was stolen,” there is no direct evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant committed the theft of the gift certificates, rather than the Defendant’s criminal act, and that there was no direct evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant committed the theft of the gift certificates; ② the Defendant asserted that the gift certificates were stolen between the documents in a warehouse, and that there was no possibility that other part-timers may have access to the warehouse, and thus, it cannot be ruled out that the Defendant could have stolen the gift certificates. Therefore, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to deem that the Defendant was stolen, without reasonable doubt.

C. On December 2017, the Defendant received merchandise coupons from a game company, and reported them immediately to the victim C. The Defendant kept merchandise coupons in the Kabter’s safe, and around January 1, 2018.

arrow