beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal was as follows: (a) visit the Defendant’s house (202 house) in which the Defendant’s friendship D was living in the Defendant’s house at the time of the instant case; (b) the Defendant’s house was packed in vinyl paper; (c) the victim’s home house (201 house) was placed in front of the Defendant’s home, and the victim’s home house (hereinafter “victim’s home house”) was discovered in front of the Defendant’s home; and (d) the Defendant’s home house was sealed in front of the Defendant’s home (hereinafter “the Defendant’s home house”) and was sealed in front of the Defendant’s home, and the Defendant’s home book was not written in the Defendant’s house.
The defendant discovered and opened the victim's home in the clothes room after locking, confirmed that the defendant was not one's own goods, and visited the victim's house to return it to the victim, and the victim was absent so that it was not returned.
In light of this, the defendant does not have the intent to steal the victim's goods or with the intention to illegally acquire them.
In addition, even though the crime of larceny is established, since the victim's home is not a property owned or actually controlled by the injured party, the victim's home line is not a property that takes possession of or actually controlled by the injured party's home at the time when Korea takes the victim's home as above, it does not constitute larceny.
Although the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles on larceny.
2. The Defendant also asserted in the lower judgment. However, the argument that D, which carried the Defendant’s home and the victim’s home at the time of the instant case, was classified into the kitchen, and the victim’s home was classified into the kitchen, is the first argument in the appellate brief.
AB made it.
The lower court on this issue is based on the circumstances set forth in its reasoning.