A. Defendant 1) On August 7, 2019, the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the thief) and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the thief) were committed against the victim’s residence, and there was no fact

There is no knowledge of the fact that the cell phone of the defendant was discovered in the victim's house due to any circumstance.

B) On August 17, 2019, the fact that the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. (thief) on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Victims E (thief) sold in high order by the Defendant was able to see one’s own interest in return for the return cost, and the Defendant did not commit a theft; (c) the Defendant committed a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) against the victim H on August 17,

There is no knowledge of the fact that the victim's cell phone was discovered in the police vehicle on which the defendant was on board. D) The victim's statement is not reliable. The victim's statement is not reliable. 2) The court below's sentence of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the victim T’s statement, on-site photo, criminal act and criminal record of the same kind of crime, the court below acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of the facts charged. 2) The sentence of the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. (1) On August 7, 2019, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court that violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (i.e., theft and intrusion upon residence) (i., the victim C had worked at an investigative agency around 1:30 on August 7, 2019, and on the following day.