The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the person ordered L or landscaping construction business operator G to cut the H-BAM owned by the victim and bring it out to H-BAM in the construction site of this case, and the defendant did not have any such instruction.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby finding the Defendant guilty.

2. The judgment of the court below also asserted the same purport, and the court below fully acknowledged the facts that the defendant ordered G to cut off the H-BAM owned by the victim through employees of the defendant management company, taking into account the circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below.

The decision was determined.

Considering the above evidence closely, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there are errors as alleged by the defendant.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

However, in light of the above evidence, witness K testified to the effect that H-BEM was directed at the site on the day when G cut off the H-BEM, and in light of the above evidence, H was recognized as favorable to receiving the construction cost as soon as the approval of the use of the building at the site of the instant construction was granted, and it was not necessary to remove the above H-BEM. However, such circumstance is merely a suspicion that H would have caused the removal of H-BEM in collusion with the Defendant, and it does not appear that the lower court’s finding that the Defendant ordered the removal of H-BEM was a new circumstance.

Ultimately, the court below was just in finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, and the Defendant’s assertion of mistake is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.