The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the defendant knew the victim's Oba (hereinafter "Obain of this case") to have stolen the victim's Oba (hereinafter "the victim's Obain of this case"), and the defendant knew the facts of the crime, and the defendant was found to have left the scene of the crime, such as riding his bicycle, so the defendant and M were to have stolen the Oba in combination with the defendant. However, the court below acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged, on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to co-principal, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds that the sentence of unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of execution of two years, the fine of three hundred thousand won, and the probation one year) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court determined: (1) in the police investigation and the prosecution investigation, M stated to the effect that “self-defense did not steals the instant Obane with the Defendant; and (2) the Defendant appeared as a witness in the police investigation and the prosecution investigation to the effect that “the Defendant was next to the Defendant when the Defendant stolen”; (3) the Defendant: (a) stolen the keys of the instant Oba in the PC; (b) stolen the keys as “in the PC room at the time, the key was laid down in the NPC room; (c) stolen the instant Oba in the PC room with the stolen key; and (d) loaded the bicycle that he was aboard; and (c) the Defendant stated to the effect that “M was only adjacent to it; and (d) he made a statement to the effect that he was made one time before he was subject to the investigation from the prosecution; and (d) has made a somewhat altered statement in the prosecutor’s investigation, but the content of the instant Obato.