The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant stated in an investigative agency that 6 driver’s seat was taken to steal cash, etc. inside a parked vehicle at each time and place stated in the facts constituting a crime in the lower judgment, there was no confession as to attempted larceny of a vehicle as stated in paragraph (5) of the facts constituting a crime in the lower judgment, and even if the above statement made in an investigative agency constitutes a comprehensive confession, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts constituting the charges by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the evidence supporting the confession or by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the evidence supporting the confession.

B. The lower court’s sentence (three million won of fine) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where the confession of the defendant is the only evidence unfavorable to the defendant, it shall not be admitted as evidence of guilt. Thus, in a case where the defendant is found guilty on the basis of the confession of the defendant without any supporting evidence, it shall be deemed that there is an error of law affecting

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the court below's examination of the evidence duly admitted and examined based on the above legal principles, the defendant tried to open the six driver's seat or the chief steering officer of the vehicle recorded in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below in order to steals cash, etc. inside the parked vehicle at each time and place specified in the judgment of the court below, but the defendant tried to open the six driver's seat or the chief steering officer's seat as stated in the judgment of the court below. However, since it was not all opened, the defendant made a confession of each crime recorded in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below by stating that cash, etc. was not stolen due to the lack of all, but as a supporting evidence for the crime under paragraph (5) of the facts constituting the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below