beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The grounds of appeal are examined to the extent that it supplements legitimate grounds for appeal, and the defense counsel's grounds of appeal submitted after the submission period are examined.
A. Fact-misunderstanding or misapprehension of legal principles (as to special larceny and attempted special larceny), all of the crimes of special larceny under paragraph (1) of the facts charged of the instant case and the special larceny under paragraph (2) committed on April 4, 2018. The Defendant, on April 3, 2018, was in a new wall. On April 18, 2018, the previous day, the Defendant only carried out N on a night, sleep, sleep, and sleep in the vicinity of the Noncheon Station, and did not commit each of the above crimes at night, and there was no difference of fact near the place where each of the above crimes was committed.
In addition, CCTV images taken by the situation at the time of committing a crime of special larceny are taken in black and white, and the Defendant and the same person of each of the above crimes cannot be readily concluded as the Defendant, even if they were to wear other CCTV images taken by the prosecutor as evidence.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all of the charges guilty is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of judgment.
B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In the lower court’s determination on the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant asserted as to the charge of special larceny and attempted special larceny among the facts charged in the instant case, as otherwise alleged in the misapprehension of the legal doctrine, and the lower court determined that the lower court rejected the said assertion in detail and convicted all of the facts charged.
In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just, and it is so argued by the defendant.