The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

1. The court below rejected the application for compensation order B, an applicant for compensation, on the ground that it is not reasonable to issue a compensation order in the criminal procedure because the scope of liability for compensation is not clear.

An applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against a judgment dismissing an application for compensation order pursuant to Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and thus, the rejection of an application for compensation order in the judgment below shall be excluded from

2. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. 1-A of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below in misunderstanding of facts.

In relation to the claim, the defendant did not return the physical knife card and the mobile phone from the drunk victim, but did not steals it.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. On January 21, 2020, the prosecutor of the judgment ex officio requested changes in the contents of the facts charged concerning the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. of the case of "2019Gohap2" from "violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" to "Habitual larceny", "Article 5-4 (6) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 329 of the Criminal Act" to "Articles 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act", and "the judgment using the facts charged as "Article 332 and 329 of the Criminal Act" from among "the judgment using the facts charged as "the case where multiple times are used" as stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article, and this court changed the subject of the judgment by permitting it on January 22, 2020. The court below rendered a single sentence on the grounds that each of the crimes against the defendant in the judgment of the court below as stated in the judgment below

Nevertheless, Article 1-1 of the Criminal facts in the Judgment of the court below in the case of "2019Gohap2."

The argument about mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.