beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine: (a) P or N (hereinafter “P, etc.”) claims the construction cost against the victim H in relation to the crime of intrusion of a structure; (b) the victim H requested repair works; and (c) the victim H occupied the instant building owned by the victim H on or around February 12, 2016, as such, P, etc. owned a lien on the instant building.
However, the defendant is a person who has occupied or directly occupied the building of this case for the exercise of the right of retention of P, etc.
Therefore, the Defendant entered the building of this case with a legitimate title to possess the building of this case. Thus, even if this constitutes a justifiable act (hereinafter “the lawsuit of this case 1”) even if the right of retention is not established, the Defendant occupied the building of this case with a lawyer’s advice to the effect that he can exercise the right of retention upon obtaining a lawyer’s advice and permission from another lien holder, such as P, etc. to occupy the building of this case. Thus, the Defendant had a right of retention on the building of this case.
In addition, there was a justifiable reason for the Defendant to have caused such mistake (hereinafter “the lawsuit No. 2”), and the Defendant occupied the instant building upon receiving a P, etc., and even if it cannot be deemed a lawful commencement of the right of retention, it does not constitute a crime of intrusion on a structure (hereinafter “the lawsuit No. 3”) solely for such reason. 2) In relation to the crime of destroying property, the Defendant limited access to the victim H by changing the password of the correction device. This does not affect the utility of the correction device. Thus, it cannot be deemed as a property damage as prescribed in the crime of damaging property, or there is an intention to damage property.
Nor can it be seen (hereinafter referred to as “instant claim 4”). Home affairs shall be considered.