All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

The request of the applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Fact-misunderstanding (as to special intimidation, special property damage, and bodily injury among the guilty portion), the Defendant had a view and set up a church entrance, and caused another to do so. However, since the owner of the building consented to the opening of the entrance of the church, the owner of the building who was the owner of the building consented to the opening of the entrance of the church, it cannot be punished as a crime of property damage. As above, the Defendant cited the entrance of the church to open the entrance of the church, and there is no fact that there was a threat to the victim.

In addition, since the physical strength of the defendant could not have been inflicted on the victim with heavy steel agents, the victim suffered injury in response thereto.

shall not be appointed by a person.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted all of the facts charged of special intimidation, damage to special property, and injury is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts (not guilty part) caused the destruction of the electric slabs to the point that the victim consistently states the fact that the failure occurred; and (b) there is a possibility that the electric slabs were repaired thereafter, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant destroyed the electric slabs.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant about the damage of property among the facts charged of this case is erroneous in fact.

2) The above sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) which is unfair in sentencing is too uneasy and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts between the Defendant and the Prosecutor) The summary of each of the facts charged in this part of this part is as follows: (a) Special intimidation and damage to special property was found at the same place on March 19, 2015, at around 11:00, and the Defendant discovered the victim E ( South and 60 years old) and got off the entrance and exit door with a net value (40cm in length) which is a dangerous object.

The defendant continues to use fluorry as his hand and "the victim".