The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the statement of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) E, the defendant made a statement on the inside of the smartphone case that he left the smartphone in the public toilets with the NAC card attached, and the defendant made a statement on his own that he used the smartphone in the public toilets, and the defendant made a statement on his own that he carried the NAC card attached to the inside of the smartphone case and did not have the smartphone. The defendant's change is not persuasive. In light of these circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant got the NAC card obtained and got it ever through the smartphone in the smartphone case, but the court below acquitted the defendant about the embezzlement of stolen goods. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Around September 15:00 on September 29, 2012, the Defendant embezzled the property of which possession of the victim was lost without following necessary procedures, such as discovering one smartphone at the public toilets in the D Motion Picture set book located in Seodaemun-si around 15:00, in order to find out one smartphone equivalent to 990,000 won of the victim E’s market value and return it to the victim.

3. The defendant, who completed a day to view a smartphone in the above public toilets, did not hold it, and if he, together with son, went to a stop box installed on the entrance side of the above public toilets in order to throw away waste more play in the public toilets, he sent NACCCC card, and she only carried the above card, and argued that she did not have a smartphone with a smartphone, on the ground that she would bring it into a letter, and she did not put it into a letter, and that she did not have a smartphone. Accordingly, the court below has reasonable doubt that she could not bring smartphone.