The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, committed a misunderstanding of facts by suffering from the victim-owned crowdfunding, but did not have any intent to steal it.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the suspension of the execution of a fine of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of fact are acknowledged: (i) the victim sees the face of the defendant several times, but his name and contact information, etc. are not known; (ii) the defendant brought to the point as described in the facts charged without the victim’s consent; and (iii) the victim reported to the effect that he did not want to punish the defendant, although he reported to the effect that the victim was aware that the above point has ceased to exist.

In full view of these facts, the victim is recognized to have not explicitly or implicitly consented to the case at the time when the defendant brought up the crowdfunding, and the defendant seems to have clearly known that he would bring about the spread without the consent of the victim. Therefore, the intention of theft is recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the grounds for sentencing stated in the instant argument and the record as to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower court appears to have reasonably decided by fully considering all the circumstances, including the grounds for sentencing asserted by the Defendant, and no special circumstance exists to the extent that the lower court’s punishment is modified.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion on this is without merit.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.