All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants (two years of imprisonment; two years of imprisonment; one year and six years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. Inasmuch as the time to commence larceny (not guilty part) is when an act closely infringing another person’s de facto control over property, the time to commence the act of installing facilities to steal oil on the oil pipelines should be determined as to whether there was any physical activity to install such facilities. However, the Defendants leased a gas station near the place where the oil pipelines were laid underground, and the Defendants started to implement physical activity for installing facilities to steal oil on the oil pipelines by checking the state of the oil pipelines actually laid underground at the above oil station. Accordingly, the above act alone did not reach the commencement of the act of installing facilities to steal oil on the oil pipelines, and the judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The lower court’s each sentence against the Defendants on unreasonable sentencing is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of the misapprehension of the legal principles, Defendant A and E in this part of the facts charged confirmed that, around November, 2013, the signboards installed as underground pipelines are laid underground.

Defendant

On December 3, 2013, A leased the “Uriri station” owned by T in Gyeong-si, the area where pipelines managed by the victim dopco branch are laid underground, while driving R on December 3, 2013.

Then, around the beginning of December 2013, the Defendants confirmed the actual state of the oil pipelines being laid underground by inserting approximately 1km agricultural waterways near the oil station, and together with E.