A. The complainant of mistake of facts (as to the acquittal part) consistently states that the defendant removed the notice attached to the entrance of apartment entrance and the elevator, while the defendant asserted that the notice was not attached to the elevator, while the defendant reversed the statement that there was no fact that it was removed even though the notice was attached to the elevator, and reversed the statement that there was no fact that it was removed, and in light of the CCTV-cap photographs found by the defendant in the elevator, it is recognized that the notice attached by the defendant was removed.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is erroneous and adversely affected by the conclusion of the judgment.

B. As alleged in the grounds of unfair sentencing, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty, and considering this, the lower court’s suspension of sentence is excessively uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On September 13, 2013, at around 23:18, the summary of this part of the facts charged is based on evidence with probative value that leads to a judge's conviction to prove that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt, and if there is no such evidence, it is inevitable to determine the defendant's interest as the defendant's interest even if there is any doubt about the defendant's conviction (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do735, Apr. 27, 2006).