All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (unfair sentencing)’s sentence (2,500,000 won) sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the factual misunderstanding and misunderstanding of the legal principles (as to the damage of property), the Defendant’s willful negligence is recognized as to the damage of property, taking account of the situation at the time of the instant case, the characteristics of saves, etc.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the willful negligence and thereby acquitted the Defendant as to the damage of property.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too uncomparably unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) The dolusent intention as a subjective element of the constituent elements of the relevant legal doctrine refers to the case where the possibility of occurrence of a crime is expressed as uncertain and it is acceptable, and there was an incomplete intention.

In order to do so, there is a perception of the possibility of the occurrence of the crime, as well as there is a internal intent to accept the risk of the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 85Do660, Jun. 25, 1985; 86Do2338, Feb. 10, 1987; 2003Do7507, Feb. 27, 2004). Whether an offender was aware of the possibility of the occurrence of the crime, or not, should be determined by the general public on the basis of specific circumstances, such as the form of the act and the situation of the act performed outside, without depending on the statement of the offender, the possibility of the occurrence of the crime. In such a case, the burden of proof for the existence of an intentional intentional act, which is a subjective element of the crime, should be confirmed from the standpoint of the offender.

On the other hand, the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have a conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.