The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not have stolen a boom, cell phone, etc. containing cash owned by E, but the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. On February 12, 2015, around 05:45, the Defendant: (a) paid 220,000 won from “D” located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, using a card; and (b) filed a request for revocation of the card with the female employee, but the revocation was delayed; (c) the Defendant reported the 112 of the Maz.

In order to avoid crackdown, the employees of the victim, and the defendant entered the rest as a waiting room for other employees, and the defendant takes up 2,50,000 won in cash within the victim E-owned spaculing column, one knife color tag, one knife color, and two knife mobile phones.

In other words, they stolen them.

B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, i.e., the victim E: (i) entered a room where female employees, including the defendant reported to the police, were out of the room.

A statement made to the effect that “a person steals wall, etc. containing cash by cutting off the door,” ② the Defendant also stated in the investigative agency and the court of original instance to the effect that “a person has come to a room and laid down the room,” and “a person has opened and examined the room,” which corresponds to part of the victim’s statement (the 20th page of evidence records and the 31th page of the trial records). ③ According to CCTV images in which the form of the Defendant was recorded at the time of the occurrence of the instant case, the Defendant used a door (the 27th page of photograph and evidence records) which appears to be E to enter the waiting room of his employee, and thereafter, the Defendant appears to have put the door into the said waiting room.