The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Reasons for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding is that the Defendant is the representative of the B Steering Committee, a large-scale store manager of the B commercial building, and actually executed the management business in accordance with the regulations on the operation of the commercial building, and thus, the Defendant is not

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts that the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion of

① The crime committed on January 24, 2017 committed by the Defendant was immediately attached to the vehicle owned by the Defendant after the victim removed the parking prohibition poster attached on the vehicle owned by the Defendant.

This is merely a defendant's act of personal retaliation and cannot be seen as a legitimate administrative affairs. Thus, the crime of property damage is established regardless of whether the defendant has legitimate parking management authority as a representative of large store manager.

② On January 25, 2017 and January 26, 2017, each of the crimes committed by the Defendant is to attach a parking prohibition poster manufactured by the Defendant on the side of the victim.

For the following reasons, the defendant's crime of damage to property cannot be seen as lacking the elements of the crime of damage to property or as unlawful.

The Defendant, at the time, is the representative of the B Steering Committee, a large store manager in B, but the “B management unit” is continuously managing the parking lot after reporting the parking lot management rules under the Parking Lot Act to the competent Gu office on December 17, 1998. Thus, even if the parking lot management authority is not complied with due process under the relevant laws, such as the Parking Lot Act, it can be said that the existing parking lot management authority is extinguished as a matter of course, and a large-scale store manager has the right to manage the parking lot automatically.