A. The Defendant did not destroy property as stated in the facts charged.

The judgment of conviction in the first instance shall be unjust based on mistake of facts.

B. The sentencing of the first instance court on the unfair sentencing (the fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the defendant damaged the property as stated in the facts of the first instance trial can be recognized.

Therefore, there is no error of misconception of facts in the first instance court that made the above decision, and the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. In full view of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime committed by the Defendant against the allegation of unfair sentencing, the amount of damage, and other various circumstances attached to the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and criminal record, the sentencing of the first instance court on the Defendant is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is without merit.