The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. In fact, the Defendant, as stated in its holding, destroyed the entrance locking device, and intrudes into maart and brought various goods, but the market price of which is equivalent to KRW 900,000,000, was not stolen.

Therefore, the defendant stolen the above tobacco.

The court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant also argued to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court accordingly: (1) The victim was stolen from 20 pieces of tobacco at the investigative agency.

The court determined that the Defendant’s assertion is also included in tobacco 20 mills on the stolen article, taking into account the following: (a) the Defendant’s statement clearly; (b) the scene photograph (the page 11 of the evidence record) where the victim took the mapt inside of the victim after committing the crime; (c) the CCTV images and caps photographs (the page 32 page of the evidence record) where the Defendant took the seat of the elevator on board the elevator after committing the crime; (d) the Defendant’s f-7 degree of 6-7 degree of f-7 degree included in the finite box in the plastic paper by cutting the shape of the finite box; and (e) the Defendant’s assertion is difficult to obtain in light of the overall form and volume of the above article.

In light of the records and records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of misconception of facts as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. As to the unfair argument of sentencing, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance sentencing is the reasonable scope of discretion.