A. The prosecutor (1) finds it difficult to see that the victim AJ renounced the authority to use, make profits from, and take measures against the instant currency and shot, and there is no justifiable reason to mislead the Defendant of the said currency and shot, and there is an error of misconception of facts in the judgment of the court below that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts alleged in its reasoning, i.e., that the defendant's statement supporting the defendant's argument, i.e., (1) that the defendant might mislead the defendant into being abandoned goods due to leaving the currency and shot leaves alone; (2) in light of the fact that "the victimJ newly constructed a house at a distance of five minutes from the closed price to bring the value of property or the necessary goods into a new house; and (3) the article to be discarded is discarded as unnecessary; and (4) the article to be discarded is discarded. In view of the facts presented by the prosecutor, the court below held that it is difficult to find the defendant guilty of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below on the sole basis of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the effect that the article in question was discarded and disposed of, and that the police officer was unaware of the currency, shot, and shotout of the removed map."

In addition, the following facts and circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, i.e., the victim AJ periodically takes place at the investigative agency.