The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant knew that the instant bank was abandoned, and there is no intention to steal.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, the bags, which are the damaged goods of this case, were placed along with the construction materials, such as part dust, at a place far away from 1m away from the waste tank, and even according to the defendant's statement, it does not seem to have existed on the side of the waste tank at the time. The provisional bank of this case does not seem to have been worn out to the extent that it could be misunderstood that it was abandoned out of the external form (Evidence No. 18 page of the evidence record), and its new combustion and physical clothes were included therein, and the defendant confirmed the contents of the provisional bank, and the defendant took out the provisional bank of this case.

Comprehensively taking account of the fact that the Defendant appeared to have brought about as a matter of view, it can be recognized that the Defendant, at least, did not recognize the fact that the Defendant was a matter of possession of a arbitrae, who is not a substance of the household of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.