The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that convicted the defendant of a thief, although the defendant had no intention to commit a larceny, is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

B. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending legal principles, although the Defendant’s act could not be deemed to have moved the victim’s goods under the control of the Defendant, on the sole basis of the fact that the Defendant loaded the old sphere currency owned by the victim in the carpet, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

C. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant was in a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions as a person with a mental disability of the third degree.

Even if the defendant's conviction of unfair sentencing is recognized, the punishment imposed by the court below (the fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the court below's determination of mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and mental or physical disability, the defendant alleged the same as the above facts-finding, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of the court below's determination of the defendant's assertion in the "decision on the defendant's assertion", and the court below stated in detail the grounds for the determination. If the evidence of this case is closely compared with the records, the judgment of the court below is justified, and there is no error of law of mistake of facts

B. There is no new circumstance or special change in circumstances that may be reflected in the sentencing after the decision of the lower court on the assertion of unfair sentencing is rendered, and further, considering the circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, and circumstances that were revealed in the grounds for sentencing as a whole, the lower court’s punishment is deemed inappropriate because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.