The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles have returned the Hphone that was stolen to the victim D who driven by himself, and the Defendant tried to leave the place in view of the termination of the situation. However, the Defendant merely collected each item in a contingent manner in a way that the victim would drive away again, and did not aim at evading arrest.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles: (i) the victim D, who was in doubt of the Defendant’s behavior, began to drive away immediately from 16:58 who stolen Hphones, etc.; and (ii) continued to drive away from the Defendant after reporting 112 at around 17:01; (iii) the victim was able to drive away from the Defendant at that time; (iv) there was time and place close to the Defendant’s act of intimidation to escape and arrest; (ii) the material of each item was revealed in plastic, but it was difficult for the Defendant to find out the material of the above item in urgent circumstances; and (v) the Defendant’s attempt to arrest the victim as a thief in light of the size and size of each item, which was likely to have been sufficiently threatened to the Defendant at that time.