A. misunderstanding of facts 1) It is difficult to view the Defendant to have taken the sound records of the victim against the victim’s will. 2) The fact that the Defendant again deducteds KRW 30,000,000, which the Defendant had given to the victim as the drinking value, from the victim. However, the fact that 120,000 won was forcibly taken as stated in the

3 Since the defendant did not assault the victim to the extent of suppressing the victim's resistance, the robbery is not established.

B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. A. 1) and 2) The Defendant asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the first instance court’s decision without permission, on the grounds that the first instance court’s decision on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance is clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, or the first instance court’s decision on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance is clearly erroneous in light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s determination on the credibility under the title “determination on the assertion of the accused and the defense counsel.” 2) In addition to exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance’s decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is remarkably unfair in full view of the results of the first instance’s examination and the evidence duly examined by the time of closing the arguments in the appellate court.

In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court’s judgment is closely examined by comparing the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court with the lower court in light of the foregoing legal doctrine as seen earlier, the lower court believed the victim’s statement at the lower court’s court’s court court’s trial and asserted the Defendant.