The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts 1) Property damage and damage (part 1 of the original judgment) had been plucking or plucking up the front side of the car driving car owned by the victim at the time of the instant case, but although there was no fact that the left side side part of the car was plucked, the court below found the Defendant guilty of all of the charges that the Defendant: (a) throw away the front side of the said car by plucking, plucking, and damaged the said car to a sum of KRW 2,081,00,000 with the left side part of the car; and (b) by misunderstanding of facts, there was an error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding of facts; (b) the Defendant did not stolen the card of the victim; and (c) the Defendant withdrawn cash from the cash withdrawal machine with the victim’s consent; (d) in so determining, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges.

B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (1.5 million won by fine) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the above assertion by stating in detail that the defendant and the defendant's defense counsel have the same arguments as the reasons for appeal of this case at the court below, and the court below's determination on the assertion of the defendant and the defense counsel is "the judgment on the assertion of the defendant and the defense counsel". In comparison with the above judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below is just, and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment as alleged by

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

B. Although the defendant has no criminal records exceeding the same kind and fine, the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means, and result of the crime are recognized as having no criminal records.