A. (1) Defendants (1) misunderstanding of facts (limited to Defendant B) did not destroy the fences as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below.

In addition, it is not intentional into a structure that is being towed by the police as an open site, but is not intentionally into a structure.

(2) Each sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant A, Defendant B: each fine of KRW 4 million, Defendant C, and Defendant D: each fine of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The above punishment sentenced by the prosecutor by the court below to the defendants is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Determination

A. (1) On the assertion of mistake of facts, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the field photograph (41 pages of evidence), each photograph (170 pages of evidence records), each photograph (170 pages of evidence records) attached to investigation report (suspects’ criminal act), and video image of video CD (books: 1, Defendant B attempted to enter the open door by sprinking the pents in both hands despite the fact that Defendant B had a sufficient space outside the pents and can be seen as a space outside the pents, and by sprinking the Defendant’s body by sprinking it several times; 2, the police inside the pents were cut off by the Defendant’s act as above while preventing the Defendant from entering the Defendant, and 3, the Defendant was found to have entered the open door with the pents as above, and in full view of the facts found in the above facts.

(2) Examining the above judgment of the court below after comparing it with records, the judgment of the court below is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts against the rules of evidence, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, the crime of 2014 Highest 88 objects to the construction of smuggling 765kV transmission lines.