A. The Defendant, as a misunderstanding of the facts, did not commit a theft of gold rums or gold booms, but did not commit a theft of USD 1,000.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. At around 11:00 on July 24, 2017, the Defendant, at the office of the company operated by the victim E, cut off the gap outside the locking office to communicate with G with the Defendant, with the victim outside the locking office on the books of other offices, 18.75g, the market price of the victim, which was located in the head of other offices, was equivalent to KRW 2.5g and KRW 2.3 million at the market price of KRW 2.5g and KRW 2.3 million under the right side of the books, the Defendant cut off the gap with USD 1,000,000 at the market price of KRW 8 million in the head of other offices.

B. The judgment of the court below and the court below duly adopted and examined the following circumstances. ① The victim stated to the police that "the head of the Si/Gun/Gu had the head of the Si/Gun/Gu on the day of the case in order to re-convenate the Gamond for a long time, and the U.S. dollars kept the remaining money at the time of leaving a foreign country, and was placed in the head of the Si/Gun/Gu, the head of Damond and the U.S. dollars were placed in the first head of the U.S. head under the right side of the office (Evidence No. 12, 13, 57 through 60 of the evidence record) and the prosecutor's office stated to the same effect. ② The victim's CCTV was consistently stated to the effect that "the head of the Si/Gun/Gu did not directly state the type, quantity, and place of damaged materials, and the head of the Si/Gun/Gu office's photograph (which is the body of evidence No. 34 or 374 of the defendant's face page).