The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In order to find the owner of a wall on a game machine in the game room, the defendant found it and returned it to the manager of the game room, and there was no theft of the cash on the above wall.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged the same purport in the lower court’s determination of mistake of facts, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion in determining the Defendant’s guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the content of the lower court’s reasoning, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is acceptable, and it does not seem to have erred

Furthermore, the following facts and circumstances revealed by evidence, i.e., ① the Defendant’s assertion that “the Defendant was in possession of the victim’s wall on the game machine to detect and find the main owner, and the surrounding areas were examined, but the Defendant did not immediately return it because there was no manager, such as the game room operator, etc. in the game room.” However, according to the video recorded on the CCTV in the field of the case, the Defendant discovered the victim’s wall wall in the game machine, and collected it, and confirmed the contents of the wall, and opened the CCTV, and clearly confirmed whether the Defendant deemed the victim’s wall and opened the CCTV. However, the Defendant’s wall was immediately after gathering the victim’s wall, and the Defendant’s attitude that confirmed what the Defendant’s wall was using the hand hand, etc. was being taken, and it can be said that the Defendant opened and confirmed the victim’s wall.