The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant had no intention to commit theft since misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles took place on the part of the main body, monitors, and co-owners of the instant computer (hereinafter “instant computer, etc.”).

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the criminal intent of theft, which affected the conclusion of judgment

B. Even if the Defendant was guilty of an unreasonable sentencing, the lower court’s punishment (fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court acknowledged the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as follows: ① the victim was to have a computer in the house and to have a key to the house located immediately adjacent to the victim’s vehicle, while temporarily coming to the wind from which the computer in this case was placed at the house, etc.; ② the time when the victim had the key as above was 11 to 2 minutes short (Evidence records, 63 pages), ② the defendant was to walk around the victim’s vehicle and walk behind the victim’s vehicle, ② the defendant was to have a computer in this case, etc., which was left behind the victim’s vehicle. ③ The defendant was to have a key to the computer in this case, and the defendant was to have a two-meter distance away from the victim’s family, and the defendant was to have a key to the computer in this case.