The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding the legal principles and misconceptions of the facts, the Defendant merely received and delivered the instant non-taking tin under the pretext of prior appraisal, etc. from the victim E to trade the instant non-taking tin, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant undermined the utility of the instant non-taking tin, and furthermore, the Defendant has a criminal intent to commit property damage to the Defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. Sentencing 1 Sentencing 200,000,000,000 won, which is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts are: (a) the Defendant stated that the Defendant should not cause damage to the victim while being in charge of the Plaintiff’s niversity; (b) the actual transaction of the niversity nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives nives, if the quality is recognized as high; but (c) if the quality is recognized as low, the victim’s nives nives nives nives nives nives nives were sold to a lower price than that of the nives nives nives nives nives.

B. As to the unfair argument of sentencing, various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, intelligence and environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and relationship with the victim, etc., are considered as a whole.