All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) The Defendant’s defense counsel asserted that the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness for more than five hours after he administered phiphones at the time of committing the larceny of this case; (b) however, the above assertion is not written in the petition of appeal or the reasoning of appeal, and is asserted only after the lapse of the period not timely filed for appeal, and thus cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal; and (c) even upon ex officio review of the record, the record reveals that the Defendant administered phiphones before and after committing the larceny of this case; (d) in light of various circumstances, including the background, process, means and methods leading the Defendant to commit the larceny of this case, the Defendant’s attitude and behavior before and after committing the crime, and circumstances after committing the

Therefore, the defendant's defense counsel's above assertion is without merit, since there are many arguments.

In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles (related to larceny in the judgment of the court below) the defendant did not steals cash on the part of the victim, as well as returned the victim's wallets and portable phone, so there was no intention of larceny and illegal acquisition.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds of the statements made by the victim who is not reliable. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby affecting the conclusion

In light of the various sentencing conditions in this case, the punishment sentenced by the court below (the penalty of 2 years, 250,000 won) is too unreasonable.

The prosecutor (related to the non-guilty part of the reasoning of the quasi-Robbery in the judgment of the court below) steals the cash of the victim F, and the escape of the victim G, thereby blocking the defendant, and again the victim G, pushed the defendant on the chest part of the victim's chest by blocking the defendant. The defendant's assault is generally and objectively viewed and objectively.