Relevant Legal Provisions

Facts and Reasons

The defendant (i.e., our client) was acquainted with the complainant's spouse and had previously agreed to live in the house owned by the complainant, receiving the password and keys to the house from the complainant.

After the complainant subsequently learned of the defendant's residence in the house, it caused the complainant displeasure. To avoid conflict between the complainant and their spouse, the defendant went to retrieve their own belongings from the house and returned the keys to the complainant the following day. Unexpectedly, on that day, the complainant repeatedly questioned and insulted the defendant, even resorting to physical harm against the defendant. At that time, the complainant initially claimed that their gold bracelet was missing, later changing the claim to a missing gold necklace… and then filed a theft complaint.

Prosecutor's Disposition

The aforementioned defendant, regarding the theft and related cases, has completed the investigation and is deemed to be subject to non-prosecution.

The defendant indeed entered the complainant's residence but only to retrieve their own personal belongings, and this was also agreed upon by the complainant. This part resulted from a misunderstanding on the part of the complainant’s spouse; the defendant's entry does not relate to the crime of unlawful entry. Furthermore, the complainant mistakenly believed that the previously mentioned necklace was taken by the defendant, but upon investigation, it was discovered that the necklace was still with the complainant's son. This matter is indeed a misunderstanding, and the complainant has since filed a statement to withdraw the complaint. Therefore, the defendant's defense that they did not steal is not without basis and is credible, thus it cannot be hastily charged with theft. Moreover, no other substantial evidence was found to substantiate any wrongdoing by the defendant, indicating that the suspicion of criminal activity is insufficient.