The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the defendant thought that the victim's wallet was abandoned by the principal, the defendant was guilty of the defendant even though he did not constitute larceny, the court below erred in the misapprehension of the facts.

B. The court below's sentence of unfair sentencing (the fine of 500,000 won) imposed on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, a theft refers to the removal of the property possessed by another person against the will of the possessor and the removal of the property from one's or a third party's possession. Whether a certain property is under the possession of another person shall be determined by considering the intention of control as a subjective element in addition to the scope of management as an objective element or the possibility of factual management, and ultimately, a determination should be made from a normative perspective in light of social norms, depending on the shape of the pertinent property and other specific circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do3801, Nov. 12, 1999). 2) The evidence duly adopted by the court below revealed as follows. In other words, the victim, at around 14:30 on May 14, 2014, withdrawn money from the cash payment machine near the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and then put it on the next game machine: The victim's 10th day after being forgotten, and the victim's 14th day after being forgotten, and the victim's 14th day after that day.

In other words, in light of the fact that back-to-face and the above wallets are located, and that the above wallets is one's own to the above part of the owner of the horse, the above wallets is used.