The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not receive philophones from C twice, but the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, so the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the statement of C, who appeared as a witness at the court of the court below, consistent, specific, and partial statement of witness D, which corresponds to the facts charged in this case, are supported by C’s statement. ② The defendant has credibility; ② the defendant has led to the confession of all of the crimes in this case during the suspect interrogation process conducted two times; ③ the court acknowledged the fact that C, at the time and time of the facts charged in the court below’s decision, delivered C’s writing to the defendant without compensation; ④ Even in a case where the defendant classified C as the defendant’s upper line, he could not be found to have any reason to accept a heavier punishment and make a false statement; ⑤ In relation to the crime in paragraph (2) of the court below’s decision, the defendant could not be found to have any error of law by taking into account the fact that C had received a new cell phone delivery from the defendant on two occasions, which is the location of the crime in this case.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.