2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① was placed in front of the victim’s well-knownness at the time when the defendant’s initial summary statement was made, ② was not put in front of the cover at the time when the defendant’s initial summary statement was made. It appears that the defendant could have confirmed that the cover was not the cover of this case at the time when the defendant took out the cover of this case. ③ If the defendant thought that the cover of this case was abandoned, it would have been consistent with the empirical rule that the defendant should have confirmed whether the cover was directly covered by the victim. Thus, the defendant had the intention of theft at the time of taking the cover of this case. Thus, the defendant’s assertion is without merit.

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.