2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant's assertion is without merit, since the defendant could have stolen the instant door-to-door gambling.

The instant door-to-door gambling was delivered in the name of the “D” office, which is a medium and high-phone transaction business entity that is located on the third floor of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City-gu Ground Building (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. On March 18, 2014, around 12:53, the victim E entered the building to deliver the instant door-to-door boxes. After the office’s door calls to the addressee, the victim E sent the said door-to-door boxes to the addressee at the addressee’s request, and then went to the building at around 12:55.

C. At around 12:58, the Defendant went to the above building, and around 13:00, approximately 2 minutes later, the Defendant went to the above building. At around 13:00, the instant door-to-door stay was rhyd with left hand, and the building was laid to the above building.

E had the above stuffed in front of the office and had the Defendant posted the above stack and had access to the above building for about five minutes from the date of the Gab by the Defendant, and the Gabbb Park from the Defendant’s Gab Park was attached without being damaged and there was no trace of opening.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.