2. As to the above facts charged on the board, the Defendant acknowledged the fact that he did harm the use of locks by cutting off the counter, but it is improper for the Defendant to interfere with the Defendant’s entry into the office of this case by unilaterally installing the locks by abusing the victim’s abuse of his position as the president of the Senior Citizens Association (hereinafter “instant office”), even though the Defendant was authorized to enter the senior citizens’ hall (hereinafter “the office of this case”), as a director of the senior citizens’ association, who was a director of the senior citizens’ association, to leave the office of this case by unilaterally installing the above locks. Accordingly, the Defendant asserted to the purport that his act is justifiable merely because it was inevitable for the Defendant to enter the above office while the victim

Therefore, according to each of the records, the defendant, the defendant, the D, and E's legal statement, the police statement of D, and the investigation report of D, the victim had a long-term conflict relation with the operation of the senior citizens' meeting as the chairperson of the senior citizens' meeting who was in possession and management of the senior citizens' center at the time. During that period, the victim, who was kept in the capitals of the above office, did not return the minutes of the senior citizens' meeting on October 26, 201 and November 26, 201, has a copy of partially altered the contents. Thus, the defendant is prevented from bringing the minutes of the senior citizens' meeting without permission.