All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Prosecutor No. 1-C. of the facts charged

In relation to the crime described in paragraph (1), although there is no direct evidence on the Defendant’s “M” restaurant intrusion and theft, the facts charged are fully convicted, considering the evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

However, the court below which found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged erred by mistake of facts.

B. As to the crimes described in Article 1-1(a) of the judgment of the court below, Defendant (1) and the lower court’s determination, although there was an intrusion on “E” at that time, the Defendant did not commit a theft of KRW 1 million in cash.

In relation to the crimes described in paragraph 1-B(b) of the judgment of the court below, there was no fact that the Defendant entered “H restaurant” at that time, and that there was no theft of the modern card, Samsung Card, Gwangju Bank Card, and Nonghyup Card owned by the victim.

Although all of the above facts charged are found guilty, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) On August 13, 2017, the summary of the facts charged by the lower judgment regarding the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake in the facts charged (1) the Defendant: (a) opened a cafeteria operated by the victim L in Young-gun K prior to the interval between 00:20 to 06:30 on August 13, 2017; (b) opened the cafeteria; (c) entered the cafeteria; and (d) cut off one room with a cash of KRW 1.7 million, a passbook 13, and a painting consisting of three seals.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property by destroying part of the structure at night and impairing the structure.

(2) (A) The finding of guilt in a criminal trial ought to be based on evidence with probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt, so that the prosecutor’s proof is sufficient to lead to such conviction.