All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) With respect to the Defendant’s attempted larceny against the victim C who was acquitted by the lower court by mistake of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, there is a fact that the Defendant has entered the second floor in which the victim resides, and had any articles.

Therefore, the Defendant commenced the act closely which infringes on the de facto control of property, such as commencing the physical activity of property to be stolen.

It can be said that the commission of larceny has reached the commencement of the commission of larceny.

However, the court below's decision that acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

(2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2) The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

2. Determination 1) Determination of misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine (1) The summary of this part of the facts charged was as follows: (a) the Defendant, at around 10:00 on September 9, 2016, at the victim C’s house located in Ansan-si I, Mayang-si, Mayang-si, saying, “The Defendant reported the poster to seek monthly rent deposit money to the victim”; (b) sought underground protection; and (c) changed the water to the victim; and (d) went into the front door of the victim’s house located on the second floor, which was opened, but did not find any things to be stolen, but did not commit attempted.

(2) The lower court determined that the Defendant was not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize this part of the facts charged.

(3) If a person intrudes on another person’s residence for the purpose of larceny during the day, not at night, not at night, the person should commence an act closely which infringes on the person’s de facto control, such as commencing the act of making the property to be stolen.