A. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor as of October 22, 2013 and November 9, 2013, the court below found the Defendant not guilty of each of the facts charged, despite the fact that the Defendant changed the password of the lock locking device of this case where the victim D resides on October 22, 2013, and could sufficiently recognize the fact that the locking device of this case was damaged by replacing the locking device of this case with another locking device on November 9, 2013 and drilling it into another locking device, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The sentence (one hundred thousand won of a fine) imposed by the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. On October 11, 2014, the court below found the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts: ① Japan, which was the part of the defendant's property management, acquired the above apartment from the victim who was the owner of the apartment of this case, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under his name on October 22, 2014; the defendant judged that the apartment of this case was lawfully delivered from the victim at the time as the agent C, and it seems to have changed the password of the locking device of this case on the same day; ② The defendant, who was contacted by the licensed real estate agent, tried to confirm whether the password of the locking device of this case was changed again from the licensed real estate agent on November 8, 2013, tried to confirm whether the locking device of this case was changed to the victim on November 8, 2013, but did not specify the time of delivery of the apartment of this case between the victim and C, but the victim did not move to another existing location.