The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant knew that he was in possession of the land other than Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and 14 (hereinafter “the instant land”) and obtained consent from E, and cans it after obtaining the consent from E; (b) the Defendant did not know that the instant high-gu horse was owned by the victim; (c) thus, the Defendant did not have any intention of larceny and illegal acquisition.

2. The lower court also asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the following grounds: (a) the Defendant may be recognized as having disposed of the scrap of this case with the recognition that at least the Defendant was F, even if the Defendant did so at least did so, by taking into account the circumstances of the judgment recognized by evidence duly admitted and investigated.

The following circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., E from the investigative agency to the court below to the court below, stated that the Defendant was aware of all the fact that the Defendant cultivated the instant scrap horse, and such E’s statement made efforts to inform the Defendant of F’s contact address through his own denial, and it does not seem that the Defendant was introduced to the Defendant as a person who simply embling the Defendant with the Defendant, while the E’s series of actions to inform the Defendant of F contact address do not seem to have been introduced. The fact that the Defendant and F actually cultivated the instant scrap horse by transferring the instant land from E would be informed immediately if the Defendant and F are to contact. In light of the following circumstances, it is difficult for the Defendant to find reasonable grounds or motives to conceal that the Defendant cultivated the instant scrap horse on the said land by F, the credibility of the Defendant’s assertion is recognized.