폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동재물손괴등)등
All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, according to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts), the fact that the complainant occupied the house in custody of the same goods as the facts charged, and the defendants invaded the above place against the complainant's will, and subsequently, acknowledged the fact that the complainant transferred the goods of the complainant, intrudes the room, and conceals the goods. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts charged in all of the charges of this case by not guilty.
2. The summary of the facts charged in this case is the person without a certain occupation, and Defendant B was the employee of the real estate intermediary, and Defendant A and the married couple were the co-ownership of the F (F, 75 years old) who was divorced by Defendant A and the married couple, and the apartment house located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G was occupied by the complainant and sold it to H, etc. by the broker of Defendant B.
Accordingly, Defendant A and H, etc. filed a lawsuit against the complainant to order the complainant’s possession portion as of the date of the pronouncement of the building among the buildings by the court. While the complainant occupied the room of the first floor of the above housing, the complainant conspireds with the Defendants to commit the following crimes.
On November 3, 2011, at around 11:20 on the above house, the Defendants came to enforce only part of the building, and returned to the court's executive officer under the above order, and infringed on the first floor room of the above house not subject to compulsory execution due to the part of the complainant's possession, and then, the Defendants moved to the land by using the emulging vehicle.
As a result, the Defendants jointly intruded the room possessed by the complainant and duplicating the property owned by the complainant.