The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal can be seen as having come to a situation in which it is virtually or emotionally unable to serve the original purpose of use due to the Defendant’s crime in this case, and the chest E (hereinafter “the chest E”), and physically, it can be seen as a situation in which it is physically impossible to use the chest E. However, the judgment of the court below that did not recognize the Defendant as guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts as to whether it has impaired the utility of property.

2. As to the facts charged of this case, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the following grounds: (i) the victim appears to have not spent any time and expenses for removal, such as removal of a sign attached to this case’s chest, by using water, etc.; (ii) the victim’s act appears to have been immediately removed by the victim; and (iii) the crime of this case does not constitute an act of the defendant to the extent that the victim’s act does not harm the convenience of the above chest even if considering the defendant’s act, such as removal of a sign attached to this case’s chest, and it appears that the chest color was cut off or ice was not left after removal.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in light of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion.