The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant has no record of theft of things owned by the victim as stated in the judgment below.

2. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below as well as the following circumstances that can be recognized by it. ① The victim, upon receiving a report on the date of the case, testified that "cash 230,00 won and D, Myanmar satisfus are lost," and the victim clearly stated the facts of the damage (the investigation record No. 5,8 pages). ② The CCTV was taken in a place where the reflectr satts and reflectrs, which the previous English is considerably worn out between the sale and the side saturbts, and the women who were exposed to the above satisfus move out of the room. In light of the above facts, it is hard to view the witness I, F, and G as the defendant, and the victim testified that "the above CCTV 200 won and D's statement that the above CCTV satisfus was made to the extent that the victim was not only the above CCTV satisfy, but also the victim's statement that the above CCTV 200 won and D's statement that the victim's statement was made out 27002.

Therefore, as stated in the judgment of the court below, the defendant can fully recognize the fact that he stolen the cash and the bags of the victim.