The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Since the main points of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) of each of the property damage and damage (the removal of each property damage and damage) No. 2015Da718 are written with a phrase specifying the removal to be removed pursuant to the removal agreement with the victim, the court below found guilty of the facts charged in this case even though there was no intention to damage the property.

Even if the defendant's act constitutes the damage of property, the court below found the defendant guilty despite the misunderstanding of legal principles because the above act was committed with the consent of the victim or constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against the social rules.

Each residential intrusion point: The defendant did not intrude on his residence in the process of using a press seal on the outer wall of the building owned by the victim.

2015 High Court Order 3037 (property damage, etc., dated December 31, 2014): It is difficult to view that the line to the wall outside of a building, with a hydrologic pen, is detrimental to the utility of the above wall.

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by authority, the prosecutor examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by authority, and the prosecutor applied for the amendment of indictment with respect to the facts charged as set forth in 2015DaMa718 as stated in the judgment of the court below, and this court permitted it, and thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed.

【Revised Indictment】

1. On October 2014, the Defendant: (a) placed the hand, which contained a frame, in front of the victim E’s residential outer wall of the victim E, located in Busan B-gu, into the wall; (b) intruded the victim’s residence into the wall; and (c) fallen from the outer wall of the building in the building adjacent to the wall by using the said frame on the outer wall of the building in the building adjacent to the wall.

2. The Defendant, after going through paragraph (1), intrudes upon the victim’s residence in front of the victim’s outer wall of the outer wall, and in the above manner, intrudes upon the victim’s residence, and removes the said residence’s outer wall on the said method.