The Court Also Called It "Questionable," But Hand Movements on CCTV Alone Were Not Enough [True Crime Case]

[Financial News] At around dawn on September 21 last year, a club in Yongsan District, Seoul, was the scene of an incident involving victim Person A. After drinking and leaving the club, Person A only remembered having left a cardigan on a sofa after returning home.
When Person A returned to the club, the cardigan, worth about KRW 500,000, was already gone. After reviewing the club's CCTV footage, Person A reported the incident to police, believing that the man seated beside them had taken the cardigan.
The CCTV footage showed Person B, who had been sitting beside Person A, getting up from the table with his companions. Person A was standing with both hands lowered while holding something. As Person A moved, the item also appeared to be folded and arranged.
Based on this scene, prosecutors believed that Person A had taken Person A's cardigan while those nearby were not paying close attention. The allegation was that Person B had concealed the cardigan around the midsection of his clothing and secretly carried it away.
Person B denied the charge. After reviewing the CCTV footage during the investigation, he was asked what he had been holding and answered, "I don't really know."
The court also found this answer less than natural. It considered the response questionable because Person B, who would likely have known better than anyone what the object in his hands was, said, "I don't really know."
However, a conviction could not be based on suspicion alone. Although the CCTV footage showed Person B appearing to hold and fold something, it did not clearly establish that the item was Person A's cardigan.
The court was also reluctant to accept the prosecution's claim that the cardigan had been hidden under Person B's clothing. Given the shape and bulk of the stolen item, hiding it under clothing should have caused unnatural contours or an increase in volume.
The CCTV footage later showed Person B sitting in a chair and speaking with another woman. Although both of Person B's hands were empty at the time, the court found his clothing and demeanor so natural that it was difficult to conclude he had concealed something.
The court also took into account that the incident occurred inside a dark club. Several people were drinking or moving around at the time. It found it difficult to rule out the possibility that someone other than Person B had mistaken the cardigan for their own belongings and taken it.
According to legal sources on the 18th, the Seventh Single-Judge Criminal Division of the Seoul Western District Court, presided over by Judge Lee Tae-young, acquitted Person B, who had been indicted on a theft charge, on July 9.
The court stated, "It is insufficient to find that the defendant's theft of the cardigan belonging to the victim was proven beyond a reasonable doubt," adding, "There is no other evidence establishing this."
[email protected] Choi Seung-han Reporter