The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the crime of this case by misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the court below acknowledged the facts charged in this case by misapprehending the legal principles and misunderstanding of facts, despite the fact that the defendant's person and his name were combined only in the location, time, and did not constitute a conspiracy.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. Regarding the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles, there is a need to share the act of conspiracy and implementation as an objective requirement in order to establish special larceny in the case where two or more persons of the latter part of Article 331(2) of the Criminal Act jointly take place. However, the public offering or conspiracy does not necessarily require it to be made in advance, and it also includes the case where the victim was made implied at the scene of crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do10408, Oct. 28, 2010). The lower court duly adopted and examined the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, namely, (i) the E police where the witness witnessed the scene of this case took place on both sides of the victim, and (ii) the victim took place at the right place, and (iii) the victim took place at the convenience point, and (iv) the victim took place at the police site, and (iv) the victim took place at the right place, and (iv) the victim’s name and the victim was found out of the evidence.

It was divided into part of the money to be paid out to the person after taking out the money, and even if the person took out the money, the part of the money was divided to the person.

2.