The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In this case of mistake of facts, the issue is whether there was 2,978,000 won in the victim's wall A, and the victim and his wife's statement are true as evidence corresponding thereto.

However, it is reasonable to say that the victim's custody of approximately 3 million won or money in the walling is considerably unusual, that it is difficult to obtain and going out of the walling on the preceding day, and that it is hard to obtain the victim's walling in case of shopping release on the following day. According to CCTV images installed in a set, the victim's walling has been placed on the floor in the state of being connected with the walling, the victim's walling was lost or stolen, and the victim did not try to find the walling in a set which is highly likely to have been lost or stolen, without viewing the walling under his own direct bottom, and the victim's house was not a restaurant that can be presumed to have been lost, but the victim's walling is one's own house with 3 million won or more, 300 won or more, 300 won or more, 300 won or more, 300 won or more, 400 won or more, 1700 won or more, 200 won or more.

In addition, E can make a statement favorable to the victim as the part of the victim, and it does not make an accurate amount of money on the part of the victim's wall, so E's statement cannot be said to be credibility.

On the other hand, while the defendant brought the wall, he was promptly convened and returned the wall to the victim by returning the wall, and it is very rare that only a part of the stolen money should be refunded during such process, and the police searched the room of the defendant.