Of the judgment of the court below, the part concerning the first and second crimes shall be reversed.

The defendant is judged by the court below.

A. The defendant is driving without transferring the possession of the vehicle to the victim and without driving the vehicle. Thus, the vehicle of this case cannot be viewed as the property possessed by another person, and the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one and half years of imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, 1 and 2 crimes as stated in the court below's decision) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court on the assertion of mistake of facts: (a) the victim returned the instant vehicle from the Defendant around March 20, 2013 at the time when the first statement was made by the investigative agency; (b) the Defendant continued to possess the vehicle on the day of the instant case; and (c) the Defendant was present at the time of the instant case at the time, and the vehicle heat was posted on the vehicle, but the said statement was returned from the Defendant around March 20, 2013 at the time of the next statement, but the victim re-deliveryed the vehicle to the Defendant on March 23, 2013; (c) the victim stated that the police made a conversation with the Defendant within the vehicle and took the key back to the coffee shop; (d) the victim did not agree in advance with the Defendant and the victim’s statement to the effect that he did not have any consistency in this part of the money due to the Defendant’s request for key and the Defendant made a statement to return the key to the victim.