A. In light of the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, the defendant found that he had a victim C, and found him to be 50,000 won lapsyed out of the wall, and that he immediately visited a nearby police box to find a lapsy, and the defendant did not have an intention to larceny. As such, the defendant did not have an intention to larceny, and the defendant sent one copy of the victim's lapsy from the wall to the lapsy of KRW 50,000,000 to the lapsy, and even though he was aware of what was included in the lapsy, the court below found the criminal facts against the defendant that the defendant stolen the amount including the victim's lapsy and 50,000 won lapsy from the wall to the lapsy.

B. The court below's sentence of unfair sentencing (the fine of 500,000 won) imposed on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts, in particular, the statement by the witness C at the court of the court below and the video recorded in CCTV, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is sufficient to fully recognize the fact that the defendant, at the time and place recorded in the facts constituting the crime in the court below's decision, partially opened the wallet between the victims C and deducted various brue cash in addition to the 50,000 won paper paper paper (in addition to the 50,000 won paper paper paper paper paper paper). Thus, even according to the statement at the court of the court below's decision, the defendant thought to return money only after about 30 minutes from the time when he paid money from the victim's wall as above, so it is sufficiently recognized that there was the defendant's intention of larceny at the time of delivery of money).

B. Although determining the assertion on unreasonable sentencing, the Defendant’s mistake is against the Defendant’s wrong recognition, and the circumstances of living are very difficult.