All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Since the Defendant was unaware of the fact that the Defendant was the principal person at the time of committing the instant crime, and was thought to be the future, there was no intention to destroy and damage property. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misunderstanding the fact, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of causing property damage. (2) The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances can be acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court in determining the assertion of mistake of facts.

1) In 2017, at the time of the Defendant’s operation of a store in Guro-gu Seoul N, the victim was unable to rescue the instant pattern from the time of the Plaintiff’s birth, and was engaged in a neutification surgery and vaccination. From October 2018, the victim was placed in the post-gu Seoul Mapo-gu to create a living space for the meat. Since the instant height has weak body, the victim submitted medical records to the veterinary hospital by asserting that there was a particularly large amount of nutrition feed and received treatment from the veterinary hospital. (ii) At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was placed above the chemical part of the Plaintiff’s operation, and that the Defendant was raised in the front of the chemical part, and that she introduced the meat and added the meat to the meat.

The Defendant, in the course of committing the instant crime, has set up a lick board again after committing the instant crime.

3 The Defendant stated that he was aware of the age of the instant high-age of the instant high-age, without properly explaining the distinction between her route and her main salk-in and salk-in.

Comprehensively taking account of the above circumstances, the Defendant is aware that the high-income family of this case is likely to have a high-income family with the main body protecting the family owners.