The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts) lies in the fact that the defendant acquired and kept the victim's goods as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, but the defendant did not have any intention to obtain the above goods.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. We examine the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below. ① The defendant, on November 13, 2015, found the items that the injured person had taken on the cab of the defendant. The defendant, on the ground that the mother of the injured person under the influence of alcohol at the time of the above day, would have been aware of the method of returning the items so found to the victim. ② In addition, according to the internal regulations of the cab company to which the defendant belongs, if the defendant found the items that the cab driver had taken on the cab, he would return them to the passenger through the cab company. The defendant was well aware of the above facts, and the defendant did not make efforts to return them to the cab company, and it appears that the defendant did not report them to the police to the cab company. ③ Meanwhile, the defendant, upon reporting the injured person to the investigation agency, did not have any other fact that the injured person had been operating on the 15th day after 2015.