1. The part of the judgment below of the first instance and the judgment of the second instance shall be reversed in its entirety.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In fact, the Defendant did not steals an article owned by the victim’s I from around 07:40 on June 26, 2014 to the Felel 310 in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

Nevertheless, the court of first instance pronounced guilty on this part. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (the first instance court: 5 years of imprisonment, and the second instance court: 1 year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the prosecutor (the judgment of the court below No. 1) and the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts, it can be sufficiently recognized that the instant facts charged constitute phiphones revenue.

Nevertheless, the court of first instance rendered a judgment not guilty on this part. Thus, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the first instance court to the Defendant (five years of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant and prosecutor prior to the judgment

The defendant filed an appeal against the guilty portion of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance, and the prosecutor filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, respectively, and this court concurrently deliberated on each of the above appeals cases.

Since each crime of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one punishment must be sentenced when the judgment is rendered simultaneously.

Therefore, the guilty portion of the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained any more.

However, even if there are such reasons for reversal of authority as above, the argument of mistake of facts between the defendant and the prosecutor is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts) The summary of this part of the facts charged is Seoul around June 26, 2014.