The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is C Company, and around 06:30 on January 05, 201, from around 06:0 to around 06:00 on June 06, 201, the Defendant, as the victim E at an outdoor assembly due to the delayed payment of wages at the location of the instant site, destroyed the banner (or the market price equivalent to 50,000 won) stating the phrase “in the course of exercising the right of retention) installed on the entrance of the said site by the victim E, who is in an outdoor assembly due to the delayed payment of wages at the location of the said site, and damaged its utility by removing one banner (or concealing it in the site office,

2. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant and his defense counsel committed an act identical to that described in the facts charged in the instant case as an employee of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) constitutes a justifiable act that has considerable reasons for the act, on the ground that the subcontracted construction business operator of C’s YY construction among the new construction of a canal and canal wells claimed that the subcontracted construction business operator could not receive the construction cost, and that it was ordered to prevent interference with the construction by installing

3. Determination

A. Relevant legal principles are that Gap's act of exercising the real force of Eul's possession at the construction site and installing a banner and a signboard and writing on a wall shall interfere with Eul's construction and possession at the construction site, and thus, it may be deemed that Eul's current infringement of the legal interests and interests of Eul's. Thus, Eul's act of tearing the banner and breaking up the signboard and fence with the wall is reasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 87Do3674, Mar. 14, 1989). (b) According to the records of this case, the following facts or circumstances are acknowledged.

1. C is a company that is performing the construction of another canal wells at the construction site specified in the facts charged of the instant case, and the Defendant is an employee of C who works for the said construction site.

(2) A victim E (hereinafter referred to as "victim") shall be a person who has been awarded a subcontract for a framework project among the new construction projects in this case and shall be paid the subcontract price.