The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (a factual error) is that there is no fact that the Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, stolen all of the farming organizations to the victim.”

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant, which is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant (1) The complainant stated in the police that "E has stolen all of the farmers' organizations to himself/herself (Evidence No. 8 pages)" and the court below consistently stated to the same purport (Evidence No. 8 pages).

(30,31 pages of the trial record). (2) The F stated in the police that “the suspect has stolen an agricultural organ from the complainant.” (Evidence No. 35 pages) and consistently stated in the court of original instance to the same effect.

(55 pages of the trial record). (3) G submitted to the police a statement to the effect that “the accused was regarded as a larceny” (Evidence No. 56 pages), and also made a statement to the same effect in the court of original instance.

(No. 43 of the trial record). (4) The police submitted a written statement to the effect that “the defendant was regarded as a larceny” (Evidence No. 57 of the evidence record) and the court of the court below also stated to the same effect.

(50 pages of the trial records). According to each of the above evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the fact that the defendant publicly made a statement to the complainant E is sufficiently recognized, and there is no error of misconception of facts in the court below which found the defendant guilty.

B. We examine ex officio the sentencing ex officio with regard to sentencing, the first offender who has no previous criminal record, and the present case is generated from the dispute over the use of the land owned by the Defendant between the Defendant and the complainant, and there seems to be some circumstances to consider the circumstances leading to the present case.