The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The washing system, as soon as the defendant brought the facts charged, is not an object of larceny, because it is provided to the occupants free of charge within the notified televis.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. In full view of the various evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, cleaning system as described in the facts charged can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant enters the above warehouse and brought them free of charge even though it is not provided as goods stored in the second floor warehouse that is not opened to the visitors of the notice of this case. Such defendant's act constitutes larceny.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged is erroneous as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.