The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In full view of the fact-finding of the gist of the grounds for appeal and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant took the victim's cell phone and the e-mail card contained in the cell phone case under the victim's intent of unlawful acquisition at the time when the defendant inflicts an injury on the victim.

However, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that the defendant did not have an intent to illegally obtain the defendant at the time when he deducteds his mobile phone and physical card from the victim, and as a result, the court below's punishment against the defendant (two years of suspended sentence in June) is too somewhat somewhat less and less unfair.

2. The decision of the court below is based on the legal principles as stated in its holding and grounds as to whether the defendant had an intent to illegally obtain the victim at the time of his cell phone and body card deduction from the victim. ① The defendant got off his cell phone in the process of hearing the victim's report to the police with his cell phone and preventing the victim from doing so, and the NowC card in the name of the victim's father was kept together with his cell phone case. ② The police officer who used to assault the victim without the victim's cell phone even after the defendant got off his cell phone, arrived at the place of this case. ② The police officer who received the report without the victim's cell phone deduction, was in a state of drinking alcohol compared to the main phone at the time of this case. ③ The defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol compared to the main phone at the time of this case, and the cell phone of the defendant together with his cell phone at the time of this case, it appears that the defendant could not be aware that he had a cell phone and body card at the time of leaving the scene of this case. ④ The defendant's contact with the victim itself.