The defendant is innocent.

On November 2, 2017, the Defendant, at the 19:37, Jinju-si, C store No. 1 floor, which was located in Jinju-si B, stolen the Victim D, using the d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's d's k's d's k's d's gal'

Maz.

1. When the Defendant pays the price of goods, he merely acquired the above smartphone with the intention to leave it to the Mart Calculation Board, and there was no intention to obtain the above smartphone.

The argument is asserted.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant found the above smartphones around 19:37 on the day of this case, and the above smartphones around 19:44 and around 19:46 on each of the above smartphones did not receive the phone, and at around 19:48, there was no telephone from F, and at around 19:48, there was no telephone from 100,000. After that, all of the instant telephone calls were turned out, which became impossible to call, and the new details were received by " call ki" additional services around 20:04. D CCTV found that the defendant obtained the above smartphones and found the defendant "the defendant was Handphone" around 20:0.

"............. the defendant did not have "........, whether D "......................,

“The Defendant asked the Defendant as “salvphone,” and asked the Defendant to “salvphone,” and continued to request D to “salvphone display” on the floor, the Defendant attempted to salvate the said smartphone to the bottom and to another place, and the Defendant was able to file a complaint against D as an assault.

In fact, D said fact that all of the above smartphones were turned on, reported to around 20:05, and reported to D around 112, and that the Defendant told D that “it was about to find it in the house without any return due to the failure to return it.”

3. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant.