The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed in entirety.

Defendants shall be sentenced to one year of imprisonment and fine 2,00.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A merely extracted pine trees on the ground that Defendant A was considered as pine trees purchased by Y, and did not intend to steal pine trees (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles). The punishment imposed by the lower court (one year and four months of imprisonment, and fine of two million won) is too unreasonable and is thus unfair (an unfair sentencing). (B) Defendant B merely extracted pine trees upon Defendant A’s request, and thus, there was no intention to steal pine trees.

In principle, the obligation to obtain approval approval seal for the extraction of forest products or for the verification of production from the owner or possessor of forest products or pine trees is not a person delegated by the owner or possessor of forest products or pine trees. Defendant B is not a person who is or was delegated by the owner or possessor of forest products or pine trees, and it is not a person who thins out forestry products without obtaining permission or thins out pine trees without obtaining approval seal for the verification of production (misunderstanding of facts). Determination of the sentence (one year and four months, and fine two million won) that the court below made by the court below is too unreasonable (unlawful sentencing).

A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed through the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to the Defendants’ assertion on special larceny crimes as stated in the judgment below, the Defendants’ assertion on this part of the appeal is without merit, since it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendants conspired to commit the theft of pine trees as stated in paragraph 1(a) of the judgment below with the intent of theft.

① Defendant A asserted to the effect that Defendant A, under investigation by the police, did not mention the facts constituting a crime in this part over several occasions and did not mention Y. Defendant A, preparing a four-time protocol of interrogation of suspect, and reversed the statement and did so with the knowledge of pine trees purchased by Y, and did not commit theft.

The representative of the victim E shall not have disposed of or permitted the extraction of the instant pine trees from anyone, such as Y or A.