A. Error 1) The natural ginseng taken by the Defendant is the natural ginseng that the Defendant collected. Since the Defendant is aware of it as natural ginseng, there is no intention of theft. 2) D is not the owner of the forest land in the Gangseo-gun C (hereinafter “C Forest”) and there is no objective evidence that D leased the forest land above C, it cannot be deemed D as the owner of the forest land.

3) The Defendant is a F-owned E forest (hereinafter “E forest”).

b) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 3 million, confiscation is too unlimited and unreasonable) cannot be regarded as the owner of a third party.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts

(2) In light of the fact that the Defendant: (a) made an appraisal of sansan ginseng; (b) D and F made a statement that san ginseng was cultivated in the said C forest and E forest; and (c) it appears that san ginseng, not the natural ginseng that was the instant forest and E. Even though the Defendant was aware that the instant forest was natural ginseng, it is deemed that i.e., the natural ginseng was owned by the landowner; and (c) as long as i., the Defendant recovered from the land owned by others, it cannot be said that there was no intention of theft. This part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit; and (b) according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court, it is recognized that D is not the owner of the forest and field C, and that D was not the owner of the forest and field,

However, in light of the fact that D stated that it cultivated mountain ginseng in C forest and fields and that D's house and garden exist in the vicinity of C forest and fields, it can be recognized that D cultivated mountain ginseng in C forest and field, and the ownership of agricultural crops is the farmer regardless of whether it has legitimate right of cultivation.