The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C shall be punished by a fine of 5 million won.

Defendant

C.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for two years; imprisonment for one year and six months; suspended execution for three years; surveillance for protection; community service for 120 hours) imposed by the lower court, Defendant A and B, are too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor (1) misunderstanding the facts and legal principles, Defendant A’s removal of the GPS device from 0,000 Cargo Vehicles Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the instant delivery vehicle”) cannot be deemed to have reached the acceptance of larceny. At least, Defendant A’s transfer of stolen goods to FF vehicles prepared in advance at the instant delivery vehicle to the Defendant’s transfer of the stolen goods to the Defendant would have reached the acceptance of larceny. In full view of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, Defendant A cooperated with E at time and at a place in the process of loading the stolen goods as seen above, and Defendant B and C made clear that Defendant B and C formed a conspiracy with Defendant A, so special larceny is established against all the Defendants.

Nevertheless, the court below found Defendant A and B guilty only of simple larceny, and found Defendant C not guilty of all of the special larceny and the ancillary charges of larceny, which are the primary charges against Defendant C, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the timing of taking possession of larceny, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) Each sentence sentenced by the lower court against the Defendants (as above, Defendant A and B: as above, Defendant C: fine of two million won) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Before determining the grounds for appeal against Defendant C by the public prosecutor’s ex officio determination of the grounds for appeal against Defendant C, the public prosecutor, as to Defendant C’s special larceny, the primary criminal name of the offense was changed from “special larceny” to “special larceny assistance,” and the name of the ancillary crime was changed to “the larceny assistance” from “the larceny assistance,” respectively, and Article 32 of the Criminal Act is added to the applicable law, and the primary facts charged are as follows.