The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles

The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case even though the defendant's act of having security guards recover the appeal of the representative meeting of this case constitutes a justifiable act that does not go beyond social norms. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the

B. Unreasonable sentencing

The punishment (including a fine of 500,000 won) sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

The court below rejected the defendant's assertion in detail under the title "a judgment on the defendant's and his defense counsel's assertion" as stated in the grounds of appeal in this case. If we look at the court below's above judgment in detail with records and comparison, the court below's judgment is just and it is not erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or in the misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing

It is recognized that the Defendant was unable to receive a letter from the victim. However, it is recognized that the Defendant was the first offender aged 77 years old, and that the Defendant unilaterally prepared and distributed the appeal in the process of opposing the Defendant’s legitimate representation by the representative of the council of occupants’ representatives, and there are other circumstances to consider the circumstances. In light of the Defendant’s character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Accordingly, the Defendant’s above assertion has merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows

Criminal facts and summary of evidence

The summary of the facts constituting the crime recognized by this court and the summary of the evidence is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 366, 34(1) and 31(1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine)

1. The type to be suspended;

Fines 500,000

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day)

1. Suspension of sentence;

Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (As mentioned above, consideration of favorable circumstances among the reasons for reversal)

Judges Cho Jin-jin

Judge Han-han