A. The Defendant did not submit the grounds of appeal.

B. As to the part not guilty in the judgment of the first instance court, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was a unregistered credit service provider, in full view of F’s method of providing credit business by taking the vehicle as security, the role of the Defendant, and dialogue between the Defendant and F. Nevertheless, there was an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles in finding the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged. 2) As to the judgment of the second instance without the victim’s explicit permission in full view of the victim’s statement and CCTV video, it is evident that the Defendant arbitrarily carried the goods, without the victim’s explicit permission, and the Defendant’s intent of theft and illegal acquisition is recognized, and that the presumption consent of the victim is not recognized.

Nevertheless, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles that the second instance court acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged.

2. The appellant regarding the Defendant’s appeal shall submit the appellate brief to the appellate court within 20 days from the day on which he/she received the notification of the receipt of the trial record (Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act), and the Defendant did not submit the appellate brief within the deadline for submitting the appellate brief, even if he/she received the notification of the receipt of the trial record from the court on December 31, 2019, and the Defendant did not submit the appellate brief within the deadline for submitting the appellate brief. The appellate brief regarding the first

Meanwhile, on July 21, 2020, the Defendant asserted that the first instance court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of community service, and eight hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable on the date of the first instance trial of the court of the first instance on July 21, 2020, but it cannot be deemed as a legitimate statement of reasons for appeal after the lapse of the period for submitting the grounds of appeal, and even upon ex officio examination,