"Thought It Was Trash..." Convenience Store Part-Timer Accused of Embezzling After Eating 5,900 Won Worth of Jokbal?

Court: "Intent Not Recognized... 'Not Guilty'"

The photo is unrelated to the article content. [Image source=Yonhap News]

Discarded Products>

07:30 Lunch boxes, hamburgers, Sandwiches
11:30 Gimbap, Rice balls
19:30 Lunch boxes, hamburgers, Sandwiches
23:30 Gimbap, rice balls, bread, dairy products, refrigerated foods

"It is hard to accept the defendant’s behavior of consuming (a 5,900 won item) without paying and falsely discarding it as waste" (Judge)

A convenience store part-time worker was prosecuted after treating a 5,900 won jokbal (pig’s trotters) set as discarded goods and eating it, following a report by the store owner, but was acquitted in the first trial.

According to the legal community on the 16th, Judge Kang Young-jae of the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 6 recently acquitted Mr. A, who was charged with 'embezzlement in the course of business.'

Earlier, Mr. A was prosecuted on charges of intentionally registering a 5,900 won jokbal set as discarded goods and consuming it while working part-time from 3 p.m. to 10 p.m. on a weekend at a convenience store in Seoul around 7:40 p.m. on July 5, 2020.

The complainant was the owner of the convenience store. The complaint stated, "The jokbal set should only be discarded after 11:30 p.m., but Mr. A ate it before that time."

Mr. A objected to a summary order imposing a fine of 200,000 won and requested a formal trial. A summary order means that if the prosecutor requests a fine or penalty without a trial through written examination, the court reviews the documents and imposes a sentence without a formal trial.

During the trial, Mr. A claimed, "I was educated that discarded products at the convenience store could be eaten, and I ate the jokbal set thinking it was a discarded product past its sale time" and "I had no intention of embezzlement whatsoever," expressing his grievance.

The first trial judged Mr. A not guilty. Reviewing evidence such as CCTV, Judge Kang stated, "To consider that there was intent to embezzle the jokbal set, it must be shown that the defendant knew or could have known it was a product still fit for sale but ate it anyway," and ruled that the evidence submitted by the prosecution was insufficient to prove guilt.

Judge Kang explained, "At that time, the convenience store had a sticker clearly organizing discarded products by time. The discard time for lunch boxes was 7:30 p.m., and the jokbal set the defendant ate looked similar to a lunch box."

He added, "A lunch box does not necessarily have to contain rice. In other words, the defendant likely thought the jokbal set was a lunch box on the discarded products list, treated it as discarded after the sale time had passed, and instead of discarding it as instructed, ate it."

Another basis for the judgment was that Mr. A had purchased items worth over 150,000 won with his own money during five days of work at the convenience store. Judge Kang said, "Considering the number of workdays, this is not a small amount. If the defendant, who has no prior record, really wanted to eat the 5,900 won jokbal set, he would have paid for it," adding, "It is hard to accept the defendant’s behavior of consuming such food without paying and falsely discarding it as waste in light of his character."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.