The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal, mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are not entirely a part of the office work in B office, and only a part of the damaged articles is owned by G and is not owned by the victim.

The sentence (six months of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

In full view of the facts-finding and misapprehension of legal principles as to the grounds for appeal, the defendant's legal statement of the court below and the evidence duly examined by the court below (in particular, images of field photographs), the defendant can be fully convicted of the fact that the defendant laid the television, computers, winds, water purifiers, and tents located in the C-council office of a incorporated association, as stated in the facts charged, were damaged. The above damaged goods are managed by the above C-council and owned by the K organization. Since the above damaged goods are owned by the K organization ( long as the snow Pung Pung is not owned by the defendant, the crime of damaging property against Pungs is established even

In light of the Defendant’s age, background of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, personality and conduct, environment, etc., even though the Defendant compensated for damages and the victim did not want punishment, the Defendant had the record of being punished several times for the same kind of crime, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the suspension of execution due to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of Drinking Measures), the Defendant denies and does not seriously reflect the crime, and other sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, the background of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, personality and behavior, etc., it cannot be

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeal by the defendant is without merit. It is so decided as per