The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor by misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine (special larceny), it is recognized that the Defendants had the criminal intent of theft and entered into the victim’s residence, 302, the victim’s residence, and even if the Defendants invaded the public stairs of apartment houses, and did not enter the residence.

Even if so, the commission of the special larceny crime was initiated.

Although it can be evaluated, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

B. Each sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the observation of protection, and the community service time of 160 hours) are deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) The prosecutor also asserted the above purport in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the prosecutor’s assertion on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, and rendered a judgment not guilty of this part of the facts charged.

2) Considering that the time when the commission of larceny begins to take place is when an act closely which infringes on another person’s de facto control over the property, the time when the commission of larceny begins. Therefore, not at night, intrusion upon another person’s residence for the purpose of larceny was committed in day, not at night.

Even before commencing the act of painting of a stolen object, the crime of intrusion only is established, and cannot be deemed to have commenced the commission of larceny. Thus, the crime of larceny is not established (see Supreme Court Decision 92Do1650 delivered on September 8, 1992, etc.). In light of the above legal principles, in the instant case, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, in particular, the victim’s sound that the victim’s dependent was closed on the third floor, or the fact that there was a lack of protection films in the kimchi air conditioning, the defendants invaded the victim’s residence up to 302.

Recognizing that the ship has a hot meaning.