A. The Defendant, on the top of the ticket list, found the victim’s cell phone and brought about the victim to return it to the victim. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any intention to illegally receive the cell phone.

B. The sentence that the court below rendered unfair sentencing (the penalty amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined at the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of fact: (i) the Defendant immediately brought about the victim’s cell phone after finding the victim’s cell phone on the top of the ticket box; (ii) the Defendant did not receive the phone even though the victim continued to go on the cell phone from around that time; and (iii) the Defendant left the cell phone at a communications agency after the lapse of three days from the date of the instant crime, but it appears to have been confirmed after the victim confirmed the location of the cell phone and sent a text message to the effect that the victim would have confirmed the location of the cell phone; and (iv) if the Defendant thought that the cell phone was returned to the victim from the beginning, deeming that the Defendant left the cell phone at the staff or the management office of the ticket office at which the victim was sent; and (v) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime at the prosecution and the lower court’s court.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is not unlawful due to the mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

B. There are favorable circumstances such as the fact that the Defendant returned the instant mobile phone to the victim, the victim paid KRW 100,00 as compensation for damage, and the victim expressed his/her intention not to want the punishment.

However, the defendant denies the crime of this case for the first time.