Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

The Defendant is a resident of Busan Shipping Daegu apartment complex, and the victim C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N,O, P is an occupant of the said “B” officetel.

The above "B" has been occupied by 278 apartment units and 20 households of officetels in three condominium buildings.

The victims have been demanded to allow the residents of officetels to use the facilities for the convenience of apartments on the side of the representative meeting of apartment occupants, but they refuse to use them on the side of the representative meeting of apartment occupants, and they are allowed to park only the one-story parking lot under the ground of the above building in the first floor parking lot under the above building with the meaning of paragraph for this purpose, and the apartment occupants can not pass through.

The contents of the “displacement apartment” and the “displacement apartment shall be made per se,” and if a person does not refuse to conduct an integrated management, a banner was installed to the effect that the apartment would not be used in the officetel parking lot.”

On March 11, 2018, at around 18:00, the Defendant removed two banners installed by the victims as above, and removed them without permission by the method inside them, thereby damaging the victims’ property amounting to KRW 80,000 at the market price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of Q Q;

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. AR statement;

1. Complaint;

1. Video files to be taken on the site of the case;

1. A daily work site;

1. In addition to an investigation report (a banner receipt) [the crime of damage to property is established where the utility of the property of another person is harmed by destroying, concealing, or by any other means. The term "the crime of damage to property" refers to not only changing the property into a state where it cannot be used for its original purpose, but also changing it into a state where it cannot be used temporarily (Supreme Court Decision 92Do1345 delivered on July 28, 1992)] and the defendant's banner installed by the victim.