The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant was only the victim at the time of the case of mistake of facts, and there was no fact that he stolen the cash of the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts admitted by the lower court as to the mistake of facts and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the Defendant’s theft of cash from the victim’s wall may be recognized.

1) The victim consistently states that there are different statements in the investigative agency and the court of the court below on the grounds that "the victim had been aware that he was snicked by the defendant at his own will while snicking at his own will, and that cash on his own wall (330,000 won in the investigative agency, and 300,000 won in the court of the court below) was destroyed." The victim reported to the investigative agency on the following day of the case: (1) the victim was snicked by his own punishment; (2) the victim made a statement that he was snicked by the defendant; and (3) the victim was snicked by snicking at his own will; and (4) the victim's statement was made at the time of the court of the court below on September 21, 2014 when the victim was snicked by the victim; and (5) the victim's statement was made at the time of the court of the court below on the following day of the case.