The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

When considering the circumstances below the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), the court below found the defendant guilty only against the Nos. 1 and 2 of the list of crimes committed by the defendant, and found the defendant not guilty as to the Nos. 3 of the same crime committed by the defendant, which is denied, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence by separating the statements of the victim according to the contingency of the confession of the defendant and evaluating the credibility of the statements artificially and physically, in a different manner.

It is difficult to expect that the victim will accurately memory and consistently state the kinds and number of precious metal that he/she has kept in his/her flat house.

A written statement of the victim on December 19, 2016 was prepared by the injured party without a light situation immediately after the injured party's report, and on December 31, 2016, written statements made by the police against the injured party on December 31, 2016, and written statements made by the injured party E by the husband of the injured party on January 17, 2017 and written statements made by the injured party E by the husband of the injured party on January 17, 2017 are merely those of the type of one item or the number of specific items. The lower court found the injured party not guilty on the grounds that there is any doubt about the credibility of the written statements made by the prosecution and the written statements by the court below on January 23, 2017, which correspond to the facts of theft of the goods listed in No. 3

The defendant recognized that he steals the article 1 and 2 of the crime list Nos. 1 and 3 of the charge, but the fact that he steals the article 3 of the same crime list is denied.

The statements made under C by the de facto victim of the public prosecution are different from the facts charged in the contents of the damaged goods.

The written statement of C on December 19, 2016: The market price of the damaged item is 13 million won per half of the market price, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2000 won per half of the market price of the damaged item, 3,000,000 gold felgs and gold felgs are omitted, and there are no facts charged.

On December 31, 2016, the police statement protocol against C: the market price of damaged items is omitted and one half of the market price is 13 million won.