The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have only been kept as an intention to return the cell phone of the victim, and there is no intention to obtain unlawful profits.

B. The court below's decision on unreasonable sentencing: a fine of one million won

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, namely, ① the defendant alleged that the part for filling the damaged mobile phone was kept in custody at the court below, but the defendant's assertion that the part for filling was not consistent, and there is no evidence to support the fact that the defendant was left in custody for return, but the defendant did not return it to the company. ② The victim stated that he continued to communicate with the mobile phone after becoming aware of the loss, and it appears to be true in light of the empirical rule. Nevertheless, the defendant stated that he did not contact with the victim at all, and did not take active measures to receive contact from the victim. ③ Even according to the defendant's statement, even if the defendant acquired lost material under the internal regulations, the defendant's return or report should be made by the company, and even if the defendant was returned in order to return it directly after keeping the damaged mobile phone for three days, this is consistent with the company's internal regulations, and even if the defendant did not return it to the defendant's intent to return it to the police station without any general agreement.