In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

In addition, the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") shall be the defendant.

On November 4, 2020, the Defendant alleged that the Defendant had a misunderstanding of the legal doctrine on the Defendant’s case and a mental and physical disorder on the grounds of appeal on the grounds of the reason for appeal, but explicitly withdrawn the above argument at the first trial date.

The Defendant: (a) committed the instant crime by specifying the victim as the subject of the instant crime; (b) misleads the cab on which the victim was on board as an empty taxi; (c) taken the cab on the premise of drinking, such as the victim, but was under the influence of alcohol; (d) while the victim was under the influence of alcohol; and (e) made the victim come home due to the lack of appropriate main points in nearby areas; and (c) did not have any fact of taking the Handbag from the victim.

In addition, even if it is based on the statement of one victim and CCTV images, the defendant committed the crime of this case.

In light of the fact that the defendant had considerable cash at the time of the instant case, and there was no motive to prevent robbery, and the defendant had an opportunity to easily take the handbag from the victim of the damage, as well as the opportunity to easily take the handbag from the victim of the damage, there was an intention to commit robbery or to illegally obtain it, in light of the circumstance that the defendant did not have the face at the time.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the facts charged against the Defendant.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant case (seven years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

In order to establish the robbery of relevant legal principles as to the assertion of mistake of facts on the part of the defendant case, the perception that the defendant forcibly takes another's property or obtains pecuniary benefits as a subjective element must have the intention of robbery.

If the defendant denies the criminal intent of robbery, the nature of the object is given.