2. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination is justifiable, and there is no error of mistake of facts as alleged by the Defendant in the lower judgment.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Around November 5, 2018, when the victim leased the instant restaurant building from the Defendant to operate the restaurant, the victim occupied the instant restaurant without operating the restaurant after fire in the restaurant building, and there was a legal dispute between the Defendant and the building delivery.

B. According to the victim’s statement in the court below’s legal statement, around March 19, 2019, the victim came to know that the victim’s goods were released from the restaurant of this case after being contacted by the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of the branch of this case. The victim resisted the defendant by telephone. Accordingly, the victim said that the victim was able to find goods on the body of the body of the branch of this case.

However, if the defendant did not take part in the act of taking out the above goods such as his vindication, it appears that the defendant, who has legal disputes with the victim and is dissatisfied with the act of taking out the goods without permission from the victim, should have argued that the act of taking out the goods was unrelated to himself. However, the defendant did not seem to have taken such attitude at all, and rather, did not take part in the act of taking