2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant was recognized to have stolen the victim’s walling in full view of the credibility of the witness C’s testimony, and the fact that the Defendant’s former criminal act and the instant criminal act are similar to that of the victim.

B. The following circumstances established by the court below's duly adopted and investigated by the court below's determination, i.e., the defendant alleged that "the victim attempted to see what is the victim's right, and the defendant saw 5 meters away from the victim's right," but the witness C of the court below stated that two persons were aware of the victim's death at the victim's right side, and it appears that the defendant left the scene immediately after the victim's right side and passed away from the scene, and that the defendant did not appear to have been aware of the victim's life. Further, the defendant did not appear to have been aware that the victim's life was the victim's life at the time of birth, and that the defendant did not appear to have been aware that he was the victim's life at the time of birth, and that he did not have any suspicion that the victim's life was the victim's life at the time of birth.