재물손괴
The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.
1. The Defendant is a person who was an auditor of the council of occupants' representatives of the Busan Seo-gu apartment complex C2 and 3 apartment complexes (hereinafter “instant apartment complex”).
The “Development Council” council of the apartment of this case, the victim D, the chairperson of which reported the outdoor assembly to the Private Police Station, and produced a banner with the content of opposing the construction works of the individual heating boiler installed at the council of occupants’ representatives of the apartment of this case to the effect that the victim D’s meeting of the council of occupants’ representatives of the apartment of this case 3.5 billion won, and posted it on the street
On May 14, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 16:50 on May 14, 2014, the Defendant: (b) concealed the property of the victim by having the employees of the management office of the apartment of this case remove the banner, which is equivalent to KRW 70,000,000 of the market price where the victim posted on the side of the access road of the apartment of this case.
B. For the purpose of preventing the Defendant from doing so, the Defendant, from around 20:00 on May 28, 2014 to around 06:15 on May 30, 2014, 23 out of 30 banners, namely, “it shall disregard the occupants of the instant apartment construction work,” which the victim posted on the right side of the access road to the instant apartment from around 06:15 on May 28, 2014, ordered the E, the manager of the management office of the instant apartment, to remove the said 30 banners.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant asserts that there was no instruction to remove banner from the staff of the management office of the apartment of this case.
B. As staff members of the management office of the instant apartment, the chief E of the management division, and the chief F of the management fraternity stated that all of them were not subject to the direction of the Defendant to remove banner from this court.
Of the police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused, E's phone statement in E is inadmissible.
D The phrase that the defendant was ordered by G from the chief of the management office to remove the defendant, and the defendant brought a banner from H of the guard leader.