The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the judgment of the court below on the misunderstanding of facts (the part of the case No. 2012 Highest 2375), the theft part against the victim M was committed by the Defendant from the victim M and did not return it to the victim M, and there was no theft of the above goods from the victim M and there was no theft of the victim M and there was no theft of the waste bags bags owned by the victim M.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there is an error of misconception of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In light of the contents of the first instance judgment regarding the principle of trial-oriented and the principle of direct examination, and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or there are exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court is considerably unfair considering the result of the first instance examination and the result of additional examination of evidence conducted by the time of the closing of argument in the appellate court, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment solely on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance differs from the appellate court's judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do14409, Feb. 25, 2010). In other words, the victim M& at the investigation agency will purchase the vehicle to the victim at the time of the crime, thereby requesting the victim and the victim to operate the vehicle in Busan Metropolitan City.