2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the defendant and A acknowledged the fact that they brought a bank owned by the victim; ② the victim went to a bank which was located far away from the victim's behavior and the event held by the defendant and A; and subsequently, the defendant and the defendant and the defendant who called the bank and the defendant were arrested the police who called the victim upon receiving the victim's report at a place less than a considerable distance from the place where they were sent to the police; ③ the victim called the victim's cellphone and sent the victim with the victim's handphone, and the defendant and the victim requested the victim to return the bank, and the victim did not appear to have been the victim's intent to commit a theft.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant as a special larceny is just, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged in the grounds of appeal, and the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is without merit. Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.