1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

B. The reasoning for this court’s explanation concerning each of the above parts is the same as that for each corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it can be cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

C. Determination as to the existence of the reason for disposition 1) As to whether the Plaintiff’s act of taking the instant vehicle constitutes larceny, it is established by infringing on the possession of another person’s property. “Possession” in this context refers to a pure de facto relationship that actually controls any property, and it does not necessarily coincide with the possession under the Civil Act. However, even if it is realistic control, it does not necessarily mean that the possessor has a direct possession or supervision at all times. In this sense, whether the property is de facto controlled within the above meaning should be determined in light of social norms by taking into account the size and shape of the property, its identity, and the temporal and spatial relationship between the possessor and the property (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 80Do509, Aug. 25, 1981). Accordingly, Article 193 of the Civil Act that the possession of the previous possessor naturally transferred by inheritance, as a requirement for larceny, does not apply to the possession of another person’s property, and even if the heir acquired the property from the owner, it should be determined by the heir 2016.