The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses of the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal is not that the defendant did not damage the parts of the victim, but it was destroyed by the victim's getting the house into the house and breaking the parts into the house.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that the victim’s chemicalization was damaged.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(1) The victim consistently stated from the investigative agency to the trial of the party that “I am inside the house of the defendant while being boomed in by the party. I am going back to the house of the defendant, and after that, the defendant am in front of the party’s house, opened the address of the victim’s spouse, opened the door, and requested a defect in conversation, but the defendant's refusal to do so, broken down the part of the defendant’s house.”

이러한 진술은 화분에 강한 충격이 가 해져서 여러 파편으로 부서지고 그 파편들이 멀리 퍼져 있는 것으로 보이는 현장사진( 수사기록 21 쪽, 46 쪽, 47 쪽) 및 피고인이 피해자의 집 문 앞에서 피해자와 대화할 때 피고인이 “ 때려 부숴 보라며. 부수라 매.” 등 기물을 손괴하였다는 취지의 말을 하고, 이에 대해 피해자가 “ 아니 제가 뭘 어 쨌다고

The credibility of the statement is consistent with the recording records (at least 48 pages of investigation records) submitted by the victim that contains a statement that the statement that the victim would no longer destroy, such as "I am.".

② 피고인은 사진 등을 제출하며 피해자가 밭에 물을 주다가 빠르게 집 안으로 들어가면서 화분을 발로 차 넘어뜨리면서 손괴한 것이라고 주장하나, 위 현장사진의 내용, 녹취록 상의 진술내용을 볼 때 이를 인정하기 어렵고, 혹여 피해 자가 화분을 발로 찼다고

Even if it is difficult to damage the above site photographs, it seems difficult to do so.

3. Conclusion.