beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.07.11 2014노495

재물손괴

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant’s return of the direction of the closed-circuit television (CCTV; hereinafter “CCTV”) owned by the victim lost its original function. Thus, the crime of causing property damage is established, and it does not constitute self-defense or legitimate act, as long as the Defendant has harmed the utility of CCTV without the victim’s consent.

Therefore, even though the facts charged in the instant case are sufficiently proven, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby acquitted the Defendant.

2. The crime of destroying or damaging property under Article 366 of the Criminal Act is established when the property of another person is damaged or concealed, or when it is prejudicial to its utility by other means. Here, the term "procing the utility of the property" refers to making the property in de facto or in appraisal so that it can not be used for its original purpose, and includes temporarily making the property in a state in which it cannot be used.

In addition, in recognizing the criminal intent of the crime of causing property damage, it does not necessarily have to have the intention of planned damage or actively wish to damage goods, but there is awareness that the act of losing the utility of property against the owner’s will (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do2590, Jun. 28, 2007; 93Do2701, Dec. 7, 1993; 2005Do6391, Oct. 28, 2005). According to these legal principles, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant operated the automobile maintenance business with the trade name of “H” from Seongdong-gu Seoul for about 10 years, ② the above maintenance business establishment and the road management between the above repair business establishment and the previous owner, and the building and the building in Seongdong-gu (Seoul), and the building and the building in question were transferred.