The Defendant is a person who is operating a recycling business place under the trade name “C” in Esan-si.

On February 12, 2019, at the entrance of the above factory, the Defendant discovered that the victim D, who is a neighboring resident, resisted to the noise, etc. caused by the factory, and installed a wall by piling up the wall on the access road to the above factory. On February 12, 2019, the Defendant destroyed the above wall owned by the victim by removing a about 3,500 won of the market price by hand.

[Defendant and defense counsel argued that the crime of this case by Defendant was removed for the purpose of passing through the wall installed by the victim, and thus constitutes a justifiable act. However, in the situation where land boundary is unclear due to Defendant's failure to conduct land survey on the part of the victim, the act of arbitrarily removing obstacles installed on the land owned by the victim without legal procedure cannot be seen as satisfying the requirements such as reasonableness of means and method, urgency, supplement, etc. even if the purpose or motive is justified, it is difficult to view that the above argument satisfies the requirements of the means

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 366 of the Selection of Punishment;

1. A fine not exceeding 300,000 won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,00 won per day) of the Criminal Act for the inducement of a workhouse;

1. Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence (the suspended sentence of a fine shall be imposed only once in consideration of the fact that the amount of damage is a small amount, the circumstances leading to the occurrence of the case and the motive therefor);