The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles)

A. In relation to larceny in the judgment of the court below, since the defendant tried to temporarily keep one gals owned by the victim, the defendant did not have an intention to obtain unlawful acquisition.

B. In relation to the crime of injury in the judgment below, it is difficult to believe that the Defendant did not have the victim's head at his odor, and did not conform with the victim's statement, and the degree of injury as stated in the death diagnosis certificate was exaggerated.

(2) The Defendant alleged unfair sentencing at the first trial date of the trial of the first instance, but it cannot serve as a legitimate ground for appeal, as the Defendant alleged after the lapse of the period for filing an appeal.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the argument regarding larceny in the holding of the court below (1) 1) The intention to use or dispose of another person's goods as his/her own property by excluding right holder, and the intention to use or dispose of another person's goods permanently does not require any intention to possess economic benefits. Even in cases where the use of the goods itself is consumed to the extent that the economic value of the goods itself is considerably high, or that it is occupied for a considerable period of time, or abandons another person's possession at a place different from its original place, it cannot be viewed as a temporary use (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do1132, Jul. 12, 2012, etc.). 2) Although the defendant asserted the same purport in the holding of the court below, the court below did not have any intention to obtain unlawful acquisition, taking into account the following circumstances admitted by each evidence of the court below.

Accordingly, the defendant's above assertion was rejected.

In light of the above legal principles, the judgment of the court below is justified if the evidence which the court below lawfully adopted and examined is closely examined.

This part of the facts charged is convicted.