The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is as follows: (a) the Defendant moved to K the site and building of D while selling and buying the land and building of D; and (b) the instant picture was also moved to F; and (c) it was entrusted to F; and thus, (d) the Defendant did not stolen another’s property; (b) the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below also denied the intention of larceny, and the court below held that it is reasonable to see that the defendant's intent of unlawful acquisition is recognized in light of the fact that the defendant did not endeavor to return the forest of this case to F for a long time while keeping the forest of this case in F.

B. The reasoning of the judgment of the court below is as follows, which is acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, i.e., the defendant made a statement at the investigative agency to the effect that "the defendant was aware of the victim by leasing the D building, the forest of this case was donated L, was owned by the victim, the forest of this case was removed from the wall of D, and the owner of the forest of this case was not the victim at the time, and was not the victim at the time." (Evidence 24 pages of evidence). (2) At the court of the court below, the court below held that "F was the witness of this case with the intention to see whether the defendant "the forest of this case is high and is about to see it."

“No. A. A.D. has money.”

In light of the fact that the Defendant made a statement to the effect that he was not aware of who was at the time of leaving the instant picture, and that he was in custody of the instant picture to the effect that he did not have any motive to make a false statement to F, the Defendant may recognize the fact that he stolen the instant forest, and the evidence of the Defendant’s submission.