절도등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) (hereinafter “instant building”) was that the victim was prevented from electricity and water supply for the second floor of the instant building on April 30, 2015, and that the victim was in possession of the Defendant for the delivery of the instant building (hereinafter “the instant building”) and was in possession of the Defendant.
2. The Defendant’s act of intrusion on the second floor and sent a voice message at the level of resisting the victim’s various actions, including a short circuit, when the Defendant’s live together F is married. As such, the Defendant’s act of this case does not constitute a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or affecting the conclusion of judgment.
2. The lower court also asserted the same purport as the above grounds for appeal.
In full view of the circumstances stated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant’s instant act cannot be deemed as a justifiable act.
In light of the following circumstances, the defendant's act of this case does not constitute a justifiable act in light of the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below in light of the court below.
The judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as alleged by the defendant.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.
(1) At the time of taking a full-time measure against the victim, the Defendant had been holding a lien on the second floor of the building of this case.
However, the defendant himself has also borne the second class test cost in the investigative agency, and he did not receive from the victim.