The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of the instant case, discovered that the victim B’s portable phone (hereinafter “instant portable phone”) was on the part of the company bank cash withdrawal machine, and had the instant portable phone with the intent to return contact from the owner on the surface of the contact. The Defendant did not intend to obtain unlawful acquisition of the said portable phone.

B. Sentencing 1 Sentencing 200,000,000,000 won are too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. (i) The intent to acquire unlawful benefits in relation to larceny of the relevant legal principles

The term "an intention to use or dispose of another person's goods as his own property (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Do3149, Sept. 8, 1992)" means an intention to exclude the right holder and to use or dispose of another person's goods as his own property (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Do3149, Sept. 8, 1992). In a case where the defendant denies only subjective criminal intent, etc., such as the intent to acquire illegal profits, while recognizing the act that constitutes the elements of the crime, if the defendant denies the act that constitutes the elements of the crime, such subjective elements have to be proved by the method that proves that the judge does not have reasonable doubt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do3605, Jan. 27, 2006).

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of factual mistake is rejected.

① On the day of the instant case, the victim: (a) engaged in financial transactions at around 14:32 at a company bank cash withdrawal machine (three-time machines); and (b) placed the instant portable phone on the said cash withdrawal machine; and (c) the Defendant was above 14:34.