He Hid Them in His Insoles and Threw Them Out the Window... Logistics Center Employee Stole Goods Worth KRW 900 Million
- Input
- 2026-09-12 08:15:46
- Updated
- 2026-09-12 08:15:46
[Financial News] A logistics-center employee in his 40s who stole more than KRW 900 million worth of electronic devices, including smartphones and laptops, over approximately two years was sentenced to three years and six months in prison in an appellate trial. Investigators found that he diverted 971 devices by hiding products under the insoles of his safety shoes or throwing them out windows in areas outside CCTV coverage.
On the 12th, Chuncheon District Court said that Criminal Division 1-3, presided over by Judge Heo Il-seung, dismissed the appeal filed by Mr. A, 47, who had been indicted on theft charges, and upheld the original sentence of three years and six months in prison. Mr. A was indicted for allegedly stealing 971 electronic devices worth about KRW 920 million from the logistics center between October 2022 and December 2024.
Mr. A was responsible for transferring products recovered through return requests and other processes to the usable-products inspection team if they could be resold. His job allowed him to move freely around the logistics center and open returned packages with few restrictions, which he exploited to commit the crimes.
The stolen items were expensive electronic devices, including smartphones and laptops. Mr. A continued the thefts by hiding products under the insoles of his safety shoes and carrying them out of the logistics center, or by finding windows outside CCTV coverage and throwing the items outside.
He sold the stolen products through secondhand trading platforms and other channels. The appellate court noted in its ruling that he used a substantial portion of the proceeds for gambling.
The lower court viewed the large amount of damage and the lengthy period of the crimes as serious. It also found that the method used was particularly objectionable and sentenced Mr. A to three years and six months in prison.
Mr. A appealed, arguing that the sentence was excessively harsh, but the appeal was rejected. After reviewing how the criminal proceeds were used and the scale of the crimes, the appellate court determined that the original sentence did not exceed the reasonable bounds of the lower court’s discretion and dismissed the appeal.
[email protected] Ji-woo Jeong Reporter