The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In regard to the crime of damaging property, the Defendant: (a) recognized the fact that the disease was broken at the date, time, and place as stated in Paragraph (1) of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below; (b) however, he recognized that the disease was frequently ill, or the Defendant was aware of the frequent disease; and (c) there was no fact that the crime of interfering with business was being broken within a restaurant as stated in Paragraph (2) of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, or that he was assaulted by the victim, etc.; and (d) instead, the lower court convicted the Defendant by misunderstanding the facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant destroyed the victim's sales price of at least 3,000 won, such as the items listed in paragraphs (1) and (2) of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, and interfered with the business of the restaurant by avoiding disturbance, such as breaking the c,000 won of the victim's c, and sprinking the cage of the employees at the restaurant, and in light of the location and spons of the cirs at the time of committing the crime of property damage, the defendant's intent to commit the

Therefore, the judgment of the court below did not err in the misconception of facts as alleged by the defendant, and the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

B. Although there are no circumstances to consider the circumstances, such as the fact that the injured party does not want the punishment of the defendant, and that the damage from the crime of this case is not serious, the court below already determined the punishment by taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant, there is no special circumstance or change that can be newly considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the court below, and the defendant again committed the crime of this case even during the period of repeated crimes of the same kind.