재물손괴
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles);
A. As stated in the facts of the crime of the lower judgment, the Defendant did not destroy a wooden wall and water pipe connected to the victim C, or opened a valve by separating gas pipes from the LPG gas tank, thereby impairing its utility.
B. The Defendant only moved a wooden fence installed illegally by breaking the land owned by the Defendant out of the land owned by the Defendant.
Therefore, the above act constitutes a justifiable act to prevent the infringement of land ownership.
Even if the structure of a wooden wall was altered in the course of moving the wooden wall, it cannot be said that the utility of the wooden wall was hindered, and the defendant did not have the intention to destroy and damage property.
2. Determination
A. In determining the credibility of a statement following the examination procedure conducted by the first instance court of the relevant legal doctrine, the credibility of the statement should be assessed by taking into account all the circumstances that are difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, including the appearance or attitude of the witness, and the penology of the statement, which are hard to record in the witness examination protocol, after being sworn in the presence of a judge, and the appearance and attitude of the witness, and the penology of the statement.
On the other hand, the appellate court's determination of credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court under the current Criminal Procedure Act is based on the records including the witness examination protocol in principle, so it has an essential limitation that the appearance and attitude of the witness at the time of the statement that can be considered one of the most important elements in determining credibility of the statement can not be reflected in the evaluation of credibility.
In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility in accordance with the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination as seen earlier, the first instance judgment is rendered.