What is the impact of an instructional error on a jury's verdict in a personal injury case?

We examine whether, beyond a reasonable doubt, the instructional error did not contribute to the verdict obtained. (Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 24.) Defendant testified that there was no agreement for defendant to repay Father; however, she intended to repay Father upon finishing school and obtaining employment. In other words, defendant testified the money from Father was a gift, but she hoped to one day repay Father for the gift. During closing argument, the defense's theory of the case was that defendant had permission to take money from the safe. The defense presented a claim-of-right argument to the jury. The defense asserted defendant lacked the intent for theft because, at the time of the taking, defendant believed she had a right to the money.