절도
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the facts, the defendant and the victim E purchased the natural seat indicated in the facts charged of this case (hereinafter “natural seat of this case”), and the defendant voluntarily taken the natural seat of this case in the future, and therefore, the defendant’s act constitutes the elements for larceny, but the judgment of the court below acquitted the defendant on the premise that the defendant is the sole owner of the natural seat of this case.
2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal
A. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court is insufficient to recognize that the injured party jointly purchased the natural stone of this case with the Defendant and jointly owns it, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.
On the other hand, the defendant was acquitted.
B. Considering the circumstances revealed by the lower court after considering the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court, the victim’s assertion that “the natural stone of this case was purchased with the Defendant is difficult to believe,” while the victim’s assertion that “the natural stone of this case was purchased by the Defendant, and the victim transported the natural stone of this case purchased by the Defendant, who was employed as a daily allowance when the Defendant performed stone construction work, to a farm located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun (hereinafter “the farm of this case”), and the Defendant’s assertion that the natural stone of this case purchased by the Defendant is very persuasive.
The judgment of the court below derived from the same purport is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts, such as the prosecutor's assertion.
subsection (b) of this section.
1) G sales of the instant natural stone to the Defendant in the lower court’s court, “The Defendant will mar the instant natural stone to the Defendant,” “the victim has no sign board (the instant natural stone)”, “the victim has less the natural stone in the instant case between them,” and “the natural stone in the instant case.”