A. It is true that the defendant conspireds with C to commit the larceny of this case.

However, the defendant only saw the defendant, and the person who directly committed the theft is not the defendant but C.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (three years of imprisonment) by the lower court on the accused is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant brought half-yearlys containing handphones and cash, etc. directly owned by the victim, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below. (A) The prosecutor made a statement to the effect that "The defendant sent back the victim's handphones to Handphones of the victim, and then put the victim's handphones to Handphones of the victim, and attempted to cut off the wall from the victim's home money, and it is not well known that there is a person to view the victim as above, and that there is the victim, the defendant would be her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her so that the defendant got off to the underground parking lot of the victim, and the defendant sent out the victim's her her his her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her. "."

No. 1, No. 116 of the evidence record No. 1 and the prosecution also stated that “I will not accurately memory the old case. However, I would like to say that I would not have any interest in the Handphone, because I would not have any interest in the Handphone, so the Handphone was the same.”

Evidence No. 147 of title 1.