A. The Defendant, as to the facts of this case, did not have stolen the victim’s articles, including the vehicle, at the time and place specified in the instant facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (6 months of imprisonment and the cost of lawsuit) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On April 29, 2016, the summary of the facts charged was sentenced to a suspended sentence of five months as a crime of assault in the Daejeon District Court Branch of the Daejeon District Court, and the judgment was finalized on May 10, 2016. On July 19, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to three years and six months as an attempted murder in the Daejeon District Court’s Incheon Branch of the District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 22, 2017.

Defendant

On September 24, 2011, 05:30 on around 05:30 on September 24, 2011, and around the residence of the victim C in North-Gu, the victim owned by the victim, who was parked on the street, opened a door of the DD test vehicle in an influence and opened it, and driven the said vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant, in collaboration with the victim C, stolen the property equivalent to KRW 9,350,000,000 in total, KRW 3,50,000,000 in the market value of the victim C, and KRW 3,50,00 in the vehicle.

B. The lower court and the instant court’s judgment 1) found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds of the circumstances indicated in its reasoning.

2) In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt ought to be based on evidence of probative value, which can lead a judge to feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is no evidence to form such a conviction, even if there is a doubt that the defendant is guilty, it is inevitable to determine the benefit of the defendant. However, such conviction must be determined.