A. The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges on the ground that the defendant invadeds the victim C's oil station with a view to leaving the victim C's oil station office clear, and that he did not steals the above traditional culture owned by the victim, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts.

B. The respective sentence of the lower court (No. 1: the lower court’s judgment: a fine of KRW 500,00,000; a fine of KRW 2: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and 6 months) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. The first and second appeals cases were consolidated and tried by the court below.

However, the crime of the judgment of the first instance court was committed prior to the crime of fraud, etc. which became final and conclusive on December 7, 2012, and the crime of the second instance judgment is subsequently committed, and thus does not constitute concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, it does not constitute the crime of each of the judgment below’

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is judged separately.

B. In light of the fact that there are many criminal records in the judgment of the court of first instance that the defendant had the same criminal records, the agreement with the victim or the recovery of damage has not been made until the court of the trial, and the court below appears to have selected the fine in consideration of equity in the case where the judgment was rendered together with the crime of fraud, etc., and other various factors that form the conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive, means and method of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime,

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

C. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the second instance court on the argument of mistake of facts regarding the judgment of the second instance court, i.e., the fact that the defendant was found to have been stored in hand on the floor where the defendant was arrested on the first floor of the gas station at the time of arrest, and ii this traditional culture is the second floor of the ordinary gas station.