All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts (as to the crime of this case No. 2020 order618 (1) of the original judgment), the defendant can be recognized as a theft of five kinds of chloe-flue-fe-fe-fe-fe-fe-fe-fe-fe-fe-fe-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g

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

A. The summary of the facts charged was F and F around 02:00 on December 9, 2019, the victim H “I” operated in Busan Y G, and F had a network from the surrounding area, and the Defendant opened a cosmetic door door and opened the entrance door inside the cosmetic, and had five chlofings equivalent to KRW 120,000 at the market price in the cosmetic book located in the cosmetic room.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the property owned by the victim together with F.

B. As to this part of the facts charged, the lower court consistently made a statement to the effect that: (a) the Defendant, from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, entered the beauty room without cash, etc.; (b) the Defendant cannot be readily concluded that the Defendant’s above statement was false unless there are objective evidence to acknowledge that there was five times in the beauty room in addition to the victim’s abstract statement; and (c) found the Defendant guilty of a crime of attempted special larceny in the judgment of the lower court, which is a single crime as stated in the above facts charged.

C. The burden of proving the facts charged in the first criminal trial for the decision of the trial court is the burden of proof.