All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the part of the judgment of the court below) are as follows: (a) the Defendant 1 did not cresh the creb between the victim and the F building, and instead, took the place front of the building, and there was no intention of larceny; (b) accordingly, the Defendant did not err by misapprehending the facts, and by misapprehending the legal principles on larceny, thereby making the Defendant guilty of having committed the crime of larceny, even though there was no intention of larceny with respect to the acquisition of the part of acquiring the property of which possession was separated from another’s possession, regardless of the fact that the crime of larceny was established.

B. The sentence imposed by each court below on the defendant (the first instance judgment: the fine of one million won, the second instance judgment: the imprisonment of six months, and the third instance judgment: the fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the case of this court 2013No2710, which is the appeal case against the judgment of the court of first instance, the case of this court 2013No2800, which is the appeal case against the judgment of the court of second instance, and the case of this court 2013No3487, which is the appeal case against the judgment of the court of second instance, was consolidated in the proceedings for the party hearing. Since each crime of the judgment below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, each crime of the judgment of the court below shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of punishment subject to aggravated concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court of first instance

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and the following is judged.

3. Regarding the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Theft is established by excluding possession against the will of the owner or possessor of another person in possession, and moving to his or her own possession or a third person. In reality, a person who is in possession under the Criminal Act shall be an object.