The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged on the ground that the Defendant did not have stolen cosmetics, clothes clothes, etc. by intrusion upon the victim’s residence.

2. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that the evidence presented by the lower court is reliable, in view of the following: (a) the Defendant, in CCTV screen, went up to the front floor of the victim’s studio building and up to the second floor where the victim’s room was located for a considerable period of time; and (b) it is difficult to view that the materials, other than clothes, among the damaged materials of this case, were alleged to be damaged by the victim since they were seized from the Defendant; and (c) it is difficult to view that the victim’s body is single memory of what the materials the victim had long been placed in the Defendant’s house and made a false statement as the damaged materials.

In light of the records, a thorough examination of the above judgment of the court below in light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is justified and it does not seem that there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.