The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

provided that this ruling has become final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (as to the guilty portion of the lower judgment), the lower court’s imprisonment (two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (the non-guilty part of the judgment of the court below) acquitted the defendant on the storage of stolen goods against the vertical compressors among the facts charged in the instant case. However, in full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below determined otherwise by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, since the defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that "the defendant knew that he stolen the vertical compressors F, etc., he stolen the stolen goods."

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the prosecutor applied for amendments to the indictment with the contents that "the market price equivalent to 35 million won" in the 2nd and 3nd and 1nd of the annexed list of crimes committed in the trial and the annexed list No. 1 was "the market price equivalent to 25 million won" prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio. Since the party members permitted the above, the part of conviction in the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake on the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below is still subject to a party member's judgment, which will be examined below.

3. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged in this part of the charges was received by the Defendant at the J, F, etc. at around 21:00 on October 201, 201, which was operated by the Defendant, and at the request of the Defendant, F, etc., to keep one vertical compression machine equivalent to KRW 20 million at the market price of the victim E, Inc., Ltd., which he stolen (hereinafter “the instant compression machine”), and the Defendant, despite being aware of the fact that it was stolen, kept the stolen goods at the J until October 201.

B. The lower court determined that the F, from an investigative agency to the lower court, had the Defendant keep his custody.