Even if it is recognized that the intent of illegal acquisition was to cope with the illegal collection and utilization of personal information on the part of the victim, the legitimacy of the purpose, the reasonableness of the means and method in that the above customer list was taken into a cell phone and returned to the victim, and the public interest to be achieved by actively accused of the above illegal personal information collection and utilization is greater than the private interest of the infringement of property rights, and the balance of legal interests, and the victim’s act satisfies the urgency and supplementary nature in that it is anticipated that the breaking of the above customer list, which is evidence for accusation, would have been anticipated in the victim’s complaint, would not have enough time to file a separate complaint in a separate way. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the illegality of the defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, and that there was awareness of the illegality of the defendant, considering the above circumstances.

Therefore, although the defendant should be acquitted, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of larceny is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The Criminal Code as to the existence of an intention of unlawful acquisition refers to the removal of the possession of the object owned by a person other than himself/herself against the will of the possessor and the removal of the object from his/her possession to his/her or a third party, and it is necessary for the establishment of larceny.