The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the court below rendered a verdict of innocence against the defendant, but the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. From September 30, 2012 to around 18:00 on September 18: 18:00 of the same year, the Defendant: (a) entered the house of the victim D with the victim D on the C 1st floor in Silung-si on November 1, 2011; and (b) 5 copies of the check on one hand (the check, number, E: E, F, G, H, I), cash 9.1 million won and stolen the total amount of KRW 14.1 million.

B. The lower court found the following facts based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.

① On September 30, 2012, the victim was forced to be hospitalized in a mental hospital by his/her birth. On May 5, 2014, the victim came to know that there was no five million won check and cash in his/her own face, which had been discharged on his/her home and returned to his/her own home.

② In the process of partially returning the deposit, the first victim acquired five copies of the said check in his/her front of the deposit. On behalf of the lessor, the broker who had reported the number of the check in his/her front of the check was able to specify and report the check number in his/her virtue.

③ At the time of filing a report, the victim’s house did not remain as a arbitrative proviso, and the key to the house was left by the son at the time of hospitalization of the victim’s mental hospital. At the time of release, the son was unable to memory where the key to the house was left. At the time of release, the victim was suspected that the son was stolen at the time of filing the report.

④ On June 12, 2014, the police verified the payment details for five copies of the check above, and as a result, had the victim’s domicile immediately adjacent to the house.