The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is not owned by the victim E but owned by the victim F. Since the victim F was left away from the house of this case and the stable of this case, the defendant renounced ownership or consented to the removal of the house of this case and the stable of this case.

Therefore, the removal of the defendant did not constitute the removal of non-owner-unclaimed articles, nor did the defendant have intention to damage the victims' articles.

Nevertheless, the court below which found the defendant guilty has erred by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On February 20, 2016, the summary of the facts charged of the instant case “2016 High 783, the Defendant removed and removed the house, stable, fence, etc., which the victim E purchased from the former owner at around 09:00, from the former owner, at around 09:00, KRW 3 million.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the victim's property.

[2016 Highest 199] Defendant from March 2, 2016

3. 10:30 Of the two, the steel structures owned by victims E (52 metric tons, 5 metric tons in iron plates) (5 metric tons), and four navigational ports owned by victims F, etc., which were stored in E (52 metrics, south) in North Korea-gun C.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court, without reasonable doubt, acknowledged that the Defendant destroyed the instant housing and stable owned by the victim E, and the navigational interest owned by the victim F, twice from March 2, 2016 to March 3, 2016, as indicated in the judgment, on two occasions, as indicated in the Defendant’s criminal facts.

The decision was determined.

1) The Defendant alleged that the instant housing and livestock pens are objects left away without the owner, not the victim E, but the victim E and F.