The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (misunderstanding of the legal doctrine) (hereinafter “instant signboard”) was approved by the victim upon the victim’s request at the time of the removal of the signboard as stated in the facts charged. However, the Defendant did not obtain the victim’s consent when removing the signboard in question, and did not completely notify the victim of the removal on the date of removal.

In addition, the signboard of this case includes a subdivision new plate operated by the defendant, and thus the defendant did not have consented exclusively to the attachment of the signboard by good faith.

In light of the above circumstances, although the Defendant’s act of removing the instant signboard at his discretion cannot be deemed a justifiable act, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty by recognizing it as a justifiable act.

2. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant operates a window and the victim C(48) operates a PC room in the same commercial building.

On February 25, 2017, around 08:30 on February 25, 2017, the Defendant removed a signboard owned by the victim (fence 110cm wide) installed on the first floor of the building D in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, Seoul, and maintained its utility.

3. According to the records, the court below held that the defendant had the defendant set up the signboard of this case on his own business site; the defendant did not receive any consideration when allowing the victim to set up the signboard of this case; that is, the defendant brought the signboard of this case in good faith in consideration of the circumstances of the victim; however, the defendant seems to have talked about such fact when the remodeling was needed by the victim; however, the defendant, who did not give any definite answer to the victim, was detached of the signboard of this case during the remodeling construction; the defendant, who was not the victim, removed the signboard of this case and sent the signboard of this case and maintained the signboard itself as it is; in light of this, the motive or purpose of the act is legitimate.