The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant was unaware of the fact that the precious metal was stolen at the time of receiving a request from C for selling precious metal on July 26, 2012, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, by misunderstanding the fact.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Fully taking account of the following circumstances: (i) the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court; and (ii) the fact that C, at the investigation agency and the first instance court around July 26, 2012, he consistently stated that the Defendant sold and asked the Defendant to sell precious metal that he stolen; (ii) there is no special circumstance to suspect the credibility of C’s statement; and (iii) there is a confession as to the commission of stolen goods and the crime of acquiring stolen goods after July 26, 2012, the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that the Defendant knew of the fact that the stolen goods were stolen as stated in the facts constituting the crime in this part of the lower judgment.

D. Therefore, it is just that the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the construction room, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts in the judgment of the court below.

B. The Defendant’s determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing seems to have led to the instant crime upon request from C in the circumstances where he/she was unable to repay the money borrowed from C, and all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant argument, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment.