The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

The seizure of articles 1, 2, and 4, respectively.

A. In light of the CCTV images at the time of committing a misunderstanding of facts (not guilty part) and the contents of other crimes committed by the Defendant, and the criminal records of the Defendant, it is sufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant stolen the victim’s mobile phone. Nevertheless, the lower court’s judgment that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. (2) The lower court’s punishment of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable as the Defendant (e.g., the Defendant’s punishment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below on the non-guilty portion (thief on August 3, 2019)

A. At around 06:50 on August 3, 2019, the Defendant: (a) discovered that D was seated on the upper water surface 7-1 platform in Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu, 85, and that D was locked; and (b) accessed D’s access to D’s platform, thereby cutting off Aphone XS’s cell phone amounting to KRW 1.620,000,000, at the market price owned by the victim.

B. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the record, the lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that the Defendant stolen the victim’s mobile phone.

1) The facts and circumstances as alleged by the prosecutor, i.e., D’s cellular phone from August 3, 2019 to around 5:35, 2019, when D arrived at platform platforms, and was laid down from around 7:20, and around 6:48, the Defendant accessed the suspect who the Defendant was seated, and the Defendant stolen D’s cell phone from around August 3, 2019 to around the subway platform. However, on platform CCTV, the Defendant was suspected to have stolen D’s cell phone.