A. Of the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts, in the case of the victim I, the amount that was stolen was not KRW 800,000,000,000, and in the case of the victim R, one physical card was not stolen. In the case of the victim U, the amount that was stolen was not KRW 740,000,000 but KRW 10,000,000,000 or KRW 170,000,000, and there was no fact that the Nonghyup

The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to shock disorder, etc.

C. The lower court’s sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the court below is justified in finding the defendant guilty in all of this part, since it can be sufficiently recognized by the victim I, R, and U that each amount of the facts charged in this case and the damaged goods were stolen.

B. According to the record as to the claim of mental disability, it cannot be deemed that the defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions at an investigative agency on the following grounds: (a) it is recognized that the defendant had received medical treatment at a hospital from January 25, 2010 to June 25, 2012, which was before each of the crimes of this case; (b) in light of the following facts: (c) it cannot be deemed that the defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes of this case; and (d) it cannot be deemed that the defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things at the time of each of the crimes of this case; and (e) it is not acceptable to accept the above assertion of the defendant.

C. The defendant is against the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the victim C.