Requirements for the crime of property damage

The crime of causing property damage shall be established when the utility according to the original purpose is destroyed or decreased by exercising tangible power over all or part of the property owned by another person with awareness that it may infringe all or part of the utility of the property owned by another person.

Article 366 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Attorneys Daegu-gu General Law Office, Attorneys Ba-ho et al.

Daegu District Court Decision 87No621 delivered on May 20, 198

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The crime of destroying and damaging property is established when exercising tangible power as to all or part of the property owned by another person, with the awareness that it may infringe on the utility of the property, thereby destroying or reducing the utility according to its original purpose. As duly determined by the court below, the defendant leased the property tax on the above site from 50 square meters, the owner of the land adjacent to the defendant's house, which was held around April 1986, to the defendant's house, and then, in order to dispose of daily sewage, etc. during the use as the house of the defendant's house, 50 centimeters in diameter, 3 meters in depth, and 80 centimeters in depth from the part adjacent to the defendant's house's fence to the above site in order to dispose of daily sewage, etc. during the use as the house of the defendant's house, and the above site was left neglected without being used for any other purpose from the time when the defendant leased the above site to the present day. Thus, the above site cannot be seen to have been used due to the circumstances and utility of the old site.

Therefore, although the judgment of the court below is somewhat insufficient at the time of its explanation, it is just that the charge of this case is not a crime or there is no evidence to prove it, and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or the rules of evidence as pointed out.

All arguments are groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice)