The judgment below

The part of innocence and the part concerning the second offense in the judgment shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than five months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each punishment sentenced by the court below (two months of imprisonment with prison labor and three months of imprisonment with prison labor with prison labor with prison labor with respect to the crime No. 2 of the judgment of the court below) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In the misapprehension of the legal principle and mistake of facts (not guilty part), the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant on the damage of property on the ground that it is difficult to deem that there was an intentional intent to damage property since the CCTV video recording function was not operated by the Defendant by extracting the connection line of CCTV in order not to raise the scene of his crime, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle as to the crime of damage of property. 2) Each punishment sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor of the amendment to the indictment filed an application for amendment to the indictment with the purport that "the defendant shall not be found guilty in the trial of the court below (the point of destruction and damage of property) of paragraph (4) of the facts charged in this case (the part of the judgment of the court below) of the court below is that "the defendant shall be selected at the time and place under the above paragraph (3) and all the connectors of CCTV on the market price of the victim C, the market price of which is installed on the calculation stand to avoid operating the video recording function of the above CCTV, thereby impairing the effectiveness of the above CCTV." Since this court permitted this, the non-guilty part of the judgment of the court below cannot

Despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles based on the changed facts charged is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below

B. The crime of destroying and damaging property under Article 366 of the Criminal Act is established in a case where the property of another person is damaged or concealed or the utility thereof is harmed by other means, on the ground of a mistake of facts and misapprehension of the

Here, the term "provoking the utility of property" means de facto or emotionally converting the property into a state in which it can not be provided for its original purpose of use.