A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles, the Defendant was found to have discovered larceny to a security personnel and was in the customer counseling room, but the Defendant secured his/her new disease.

The purpose of escape from arrest is recognized by assaulting security personnel to leave the customer counseling room in a situation where it is impossible to do so. Since the face of the security personnel is at prices, ballebing the body, etc., which is sufficient to suppress the attack power of arrest objectively, such as scaming the body, etc., the crime of robbery is established.

However, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, that the extent of the assault committed by the victims for the purpose of evading arrest, or that the degree of the assault did not reach the degree of suppressing the victims’ intention to arrest.

In light of the foregoing, the lower court acquitted the quasi-Robbery.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. On June 22, 2018, the summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) around 20:00, the Defendant: (b) used the gap in which surveillance was neglected; (c) removed the security straw up to the half-ro of the market price of 44,800 won for male, and then put it into the left part of the main machine; (d) 24,480 won of the market price; (e) 30,00 won of the market price; and (e) 30,000 won of the market price and 14,000 won of the 30,000 won of the 2,00 won of the 2,00,000 won of the 2,000 won of the 2,000 won of the 30,000 won of the 2,000 won of the 30,000 won of the 30,000 won of the 30,00.

At this time, the defendant opened a door of the above customer counseling room to escape and prevented the victim G (28 Doe) and H (33 Doe) who is the security personnel of the Mart from escape, and the defendant shall evade arrest.