The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The main points of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles) are to extract posts installed by the defendant to indicate the boundaries between the defendant and the victim's land, and to recognize the fact that the defendant has harmed the functions of the dial bank as a boundary, but the court below did not recognize it. In so determining, it erred by misapprehending the legal principles

Judgment

I will examine ex officio prior to the prosecutor's amendment of indictment and the judgment on the grounds for appeal subject to the trial of this court.

In the trial of the court below, the prosecutor added the ancillary charges as follows, and applied for permission to amend the Bill of Indictment with the addition of the name of the conjunctive crime, the name of the conjunctive crime, and Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the name of the conjunctive crime, and the applicable provisions of the preliminary law, and the court permitted the prosecutor to amend the Bill of Amendment as above.

[Preliminary facts charged] On May 22, 2018, the Defendant, among the Dos organized the Defendant’s dry field located in Jinando-gun B of North Korea, he extracted three posts located in the victim’s possession to indicate the boundary between the Defendant’s dry field and the Defendant’s paddy field adjacent thereto, and destroyed the property owned by the victim by abandoning dumping the embankment accumulated in the part of the victim’s ownership.

Although this court added the object to the judgment by permitting the modification of the bill of indictment, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles on the part of innocence (the point of boundary violation caused by the prosecutor's modification of indictment) as stated in the judgment of the court is still subject to the judgment of the court of this case. Thus, we will examine the primary

The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds that the facts charged in the instant case constituted a case where there is no proof of criminal facts for the following reasons.

(1) The defendant dry field and the victim's side.