The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant did not return a smartphone to the victim, but did not intend to embezzlement the procedure.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (hereinafter “the penalty amount of KRW 1,00,000”) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant denied the criminal intent of embezzlement; however, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the Defendant attempted to sell smartphones acquired in the police investigation process. However, the Defendant and the telephone delivery service provider refused to purchase and sell them, not by purchasing them; and the Defendant was placed on a person who wants to purchase.

In light of the fact that the Defendant made a statement and made a confession that the Defendant did not intend to return it to the victim, and the Defendant made a phone call to the stolen business operator at the time of acquiring smartphones, and the Defendant does not have any effort to return it to the victim for about three months from the day of learning each smartphone of this case to the day of the commencement of the investigation of this case, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant had the criminal intent of embezzlement of possession deserted articles.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Although there are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant did not have the same criminal history, the defendant does not seem to have any attitude against his/her wrongness while disputing the criminal intent of embezzlement of the separated object in possession. In addition, considering the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., all of the sentencing conditions stated in the records and the previous theories, such as the records of this case, including the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance after the crime, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below is too unreasonable, and therefore

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.