재물손괴
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The court below found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds of the charge of causing property damage, which is the primary charge, among the facts charged in the instant case, and found the Defendant guilty on the obstruction of business, which is the ancillary charge. The Defendant filed an appeal only for the guilty part of the judgment below, and the prosecutor did not appeal.
Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below on acquittal of the above reasons is subject to the appellate court's judgment, but is in fact relieved of the object of the trial from the object of attack and defense by the parties, so this part is subject to the conclusion of the judgment of the court below
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The mistake of fact that the victim was unable to move his/her motor vehicle is due to his/her prior deliberation on the motor vehicle, and the defendant did not obstruct the passage of the motor vehicle.
B. The victim of the misapprehension of the legal principle does not use the car of this case for business purposes, and therefore the defendant's act does not interfere with the victim's business.
3. Determination
A. The following facts are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in the court below's judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts. In other words, the defendant stated in an investigative agency that "if the defendant has parked the victim's vehicle without permission because it is difficult to use the victim's vehicle without permission, the defendant will leave the vehicle without permission," and that "in the investigation report (No. 18 pages of the evidence record) also states that the victim was in a state in which he was unable to drive the vehicle at all," and it is clear that the victim's vehicle was set off as the part of the defendant's vehicle even in the image of each photograph of 29 to 33 pages of the evidence record, and it is not possible that the victim could not move his vehicle for 36 hours."