The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, even though the Defendant conspired to commit the theft of this case and did not intend to commit it, he did not have to do so inevitably to the scene of the crime of this case, which is co-defendant A, and even though he continued to speak A, A had committed the crime by shouldering the glass of the precious metal store of this case. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any criminal intent or committed the crime of this case in collusion with A.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of suspended sentence for one year of imprisonment, two years of probation, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service order) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In regard to the assertion of mistake of facts, there is not a legally required punishment, but a combination of two or more persons’ intent to realize a crime through the joint processing of the two or more persons. As such, there is a conspiracy between several persons in the order of precedence or impliedly and the combination of their intent.

In addition, strict proof is required to recognize such a conspiracy, but where the defendant denies the conspiracy, which is a subjective element of the crime, it is inevitable to prove it by the method of proving indirect facts or circumstantial facts having considerable relevance to the nature of the object, and in such a case, what constitutes indirect facts having considerable relevance should be determined by the method of reasonably determining the connection of the fact through close observation and analysis based on normal empirical rule.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do6706 Decided September 11, 2008, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, in particular, the photograph (Evidence Nos. 45 through 47, 88, 89, 102, 208 through 210) attached to each investigation report, and the seizure protocol of July 12, 2012 (Evidence No. 121 and 122 of the Evidence Record), the defendant, together with Co-defendant A, who is a co-defendant of the court below, came to know of the gold.