A. In fact, the Defendant had no intention of theft, since he merely brought about the instant damaged goods by actual waterways in the process of exchanging the previously purchased cosmetics with others.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant made the same assertion in the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of mistake of facts, and the lower court rejected the allegation in detail and with detailed statement of the above assertion under the title “determination on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion” of the judgment.

Examining the judgment of the court below in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is justifiable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. Determination of the illegality of sentencing is recognized that the injury of the instant case was returned, and the Defendant is the primary offender.

However, considering the fact that the defendant denies the crime of this case and does not seem to be genuinely against the defendant, there is no change of circumstances that may be considered favorable to the defendant in the trial, and other various sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, the circumstances and result of the crime of this case, etc., it is deemed that the court below's punishment is too unreasonable, and therefore, the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing is not reasonable.

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