The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The facts charged in this case

A. Around October 2013, the Defendant destroyed a building by removing an outer wall that was originally set up on the right side of the part of the building (attached Form 5, 6, 7 parts), which was not leased, while he leased and used part of part of the above ground assembly type building in the name of the wife F, in Gwangju City E, which was owned by the victim D, around October 2013.

B. On November 2013, the Defendant interfering with business.

A. The victim D, a building owner, has not been leased at the place described in the subsection.

On the part of the building (attached drawings, e.g., e.,6, 7 parts) entered in the port, the leased advertisement was defective by requesting a real estate broker to rent to the real estate broker, and the paper of the A4 site size stating the "leased" was attached to the building glass, making it difficult for the victim to rent to a third party, thereby hindering the leased business of the victim by deceptive means.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the facts charged in the instant case, such as the presumed facts, prior to the judgment on the facts charged, the instant case was derived from civil litigation where D, as the Plaintiff’s husband and wife, filed a claim suit, such as the name of the building, on the part of “A” indicated in the separate drawings among the assembly type buildings in the instant case (hereinafter “A” for convenience, i.e., “v., vi., and g.,” and “B” portion of “v.,6, and g.,” indicated in the separate drawings.

The above civil procedure is disputed as to whether the scope of the lease contract object on part of the building of this case between the plaintiff D and the defendant's husband and wife is limited only to "A", or whether it is included in "B", the term of lease, and the rent. However, D was recommended by a certified judicial scrivener during the process of the above civil procedure and filed a complaint as to the facts charged of this case.

The judgment on the facts charged of this case is based on the “A” scope of the leased object of the instant lease agreement concluded between D and the Defendant’s husband and wife in the current civil procedure.