The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine of constructive consent that found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds of the victim’s constructive consent.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the circumstances acknowledged by the witness I, J, and D’s respective statutory statements; (b) the Defendant, who was continuing to the steel construction work at the Chungcheong-gun E river work site (hereinafter “E site”) in the instant case, where the number falls short of the number prior to the date of the commission of the crime, he/she borrowed the steel from the victim F&F company’s G river work (hereinafter “G construction site”) during construction to return it again; (c) the number of the steel bars brought by the Defendant is not one and the amount of the said scrap; and (d) if the Defendant was sold on the water, it is only nine to one hundred won; and (e) if the Defendant was given a day on more than one day, it is necessary to obtain the Defendant’s consent from the Defendant, and (e) if the Defendant did not know that he/she would have come to use the iron on his/her own, it is not necessary to use it before the date of the instant crime, and (e) if the Defendant did not use it on his/her own own interest.