A. As to a mistake of facts, first of all, the Defendant merely borrowed or attempted to borrow money from the victim, and did not borrow money from the victim on the ground that the victim reported the fact that the victim is conducting business on an illegal street store.

In addition, with respect to the damage of property, the defendant was under the influence of alcohol and was placed on the street of the victim, but the defendant did not remove or take the seat as shown in the facts charged in the instant case and did not damage the seat.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case by misunderstanding the facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, the defendant: (a) there was a lack of the number of walscrus purchased from the victim of an over-road shop; (b) the defendant reported that the victim would engage in an illegal occupation-based business; and (c) at any time thereafter, he requested the victim's street store to pay the amount of money; (d) the defendant would have acted as if he reported an illegal occupation-based business; (e) the defendant alleged to borrow money from the victim, but the defendant did not know his personal information or contact details to the victim; (e) the defendant was unable to believe that he did not know the victim's personal information or contact details; and (e) the defendant was incidental to the odscrut that the victim used and moved to the od's street store; and (e) the defendant tried to borrow or take money from the victim; and (e) the charges of this case that the defendant damaged the victim's goods.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

B. Unreasonable sentencing is inappropriate.