The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the charge of larceny on June 19, 2016 (No. 2017 order 1967); and (1) according to a reply to a request from the National Science Investigation Agency for appraisal, DNA punishment detected outside the upper part of the damaged vehicle recorded in the facts charged conforms to the Defendant’s DNA punishment; and (2) the Defendant: (a) he sprinks the sprinkling of the sprinks in the vicinity of the time and place indicated in the facts charged; (b) he sprinks the sprinks of the sprinks and sprinks by sprinking the sprinks of the sprinks and sprinks in the middle of the sprinks and sprinks; and (c) in light of the fact that the Defendant sprinks or sprinks of the victim’s car with his hand, etc., he can sufficiently be found to have been subject to punishment.”

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged, and the court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service) is deemed unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged (the part concerning the crime, 2017 high group 1967) finds out the victim G’s vehicle at the front of the Cheongju Medical Center located in 48, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Cheongju from around 09:30 on June 19, 2016 to 12:00,000 won in cash of the victim’s 60,000 won in front of the driver’s seat.

L. A. L. theft was committed.

B. The judgment of the court below and this court 1).