문서손괴
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The Defendant considers that each of the documents (in total 20 copies of the detailed evaluation sheet, hereinafter “the document of this case”) recorded in the facts constituting an offense as indicated in the judgment of the court below is unnecessary in the course of reorganization of the documents misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the grounds for appeal, and does not tear to the auditor of the resident representative meeting.
The Defendant did not have any intention of damage to the same purport even in the lower court’s determination as to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles regarding sentencing.
In light of the circumstances of the judgment, the court below acknowledged the above criminal facts by finding that the defendant intentionally teared the documents of this case and the above documents were recorded as material facts in law or social life, and they constitute the object of the crime of destruction.
In full view of all the evidence and circumstances in the judgment below, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misunderstanding the facts alleged by the defendant or misunderstanding the legal principles.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
It is reasonable to respect the judgment of the first-class sentencing in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first-class judgment, and the first-class sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.
Considering the fact that the defendant made efforts for apartment management as the chairperson of the representative meeting of occupants, and that it is the first offender, the above sentencing conditions have been significantly changed in the depth.
It is difficult to view the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, records of crime, motive and circumstance of crime, and circumstances after crime, etc. in light of the sentencing conditions, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, 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 without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.