The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding (as to the Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do's Do'

B. The lower court’s sentence (2 million won in penalty) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged [the Do's point] is that the Defendant owned the victim's father's wife at the victim E's home located in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-gu, Seoul, on January 2017, and the judgment of the court below in the indictment and the judgment of the court below are as follows: (a) according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, such as the statement of the Defendant and the victim's investigative agency, the Defendant's selling of this case is the neck of the victim's wife who was under custody by the victim E; and (b) such alteration is deemed as above.

approximately 1 million won of the market price of the city was stolen with a 24K net gold paper.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendant committed a theft with one of the above net gold scrap as stated in this part of the facts charged.

(c)

The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the victim consistently stated in the investigative agency that "the defendant brought the above neck from the victim's house to the victim's wife, and that the defendant's neck was a parent of the victim's wife, and there is no reason to permit the defendant to bring the above neck." The defendant's investigative agency recognized that the above neck was the victim's father, but the defendant did not explain the circumstances and reasons for the permission of the above neck's disposal from the victim. The defendant did not explain to the victim about the reason why the above neck's disposal was permitted, and the defendant recognized this part of the facts charged in the court below.