A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant left from the instant construction site by G Co., Ltd. or H Co., Ltd., whose inside director was the Defendant, and the Defendant legitimately exercised the right to discape possession pursuant to Article 209(2) of the Civil Act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of suspended sentence for six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion after specifically explaining in the "decision on the defendant's and his/her defense counsel's assertion" in the judgment of the court below on the same grounds as the grounds for appeal. If the court below reviewed the evidence legitimately adopted and investigated in light of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misconception of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it in the appellate

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court appears to have determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of various circumstances, such as the background and consequence of the Defendant’s act as above, and the result thereof. No new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial. In addition, the lower court’s sentencing is determined by taking account of all the sentencing factors indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.