The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal did not steals the cell phone of the victim;

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) On October 28, 2012, Defendant C provided meals at “Dcafeteria” located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and all of the deaf-mutes had their mobile phones maintained vibration.

(2) The victim and the female-friendly Gu G (hereinafter “victim, etc.”) posted a cell phone from the victim’s cell phone to the victim’s cell phone in order to be seen as the victim’s cell phone during the Do which provided meals in the next table. However, in the Defendant’s daily activity, which was calculated at the time, there was the same Belgium as the victim set up.

(3) At around 17:24 on the same day, the Defendant: (a) passed through the subway stations at the above restaurant and around 17:40, and transferred the bus from the window stations located within the distance of the two stations from the subway stations; and (b) boarded the bus and returned from the Treasury Station.

(4) At around 17:40 on the day, the victim et al. placed a cell phone on the victim’s cell phone. However, at that point, the victim et al. displayed a cell phone on the stib, where the Defendant confirmed the cell phone at the river basin store.

(5) At around 17:47 on the day, the victim, etc. placed a phone on the victim’s cell phone again, but the subway information voice called “wind-dong station.”

(6) The location at which the victim’s cell phone last location is identified is near the House of Government.

B. The defendant is deemed to have stolen the victim's mobile phone.

3. Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per