The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing) the Defendant did not tear the notice in front of D, and the Defendant’s act constitutes justifiable act.

The sentence of the court below is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is without merit, since the defendant can be found to have the tear of the notice that had already been paid two sculptures in the apartment management room before see D.

The court below held that the defendant's act was an urgent and inevitable means, since it is difficult to see that the defendant's act was reasonable in the means and method, it cannot be accepted in light of social norms

As can not be seen, it was determined that the act does not constitute a justifiable act.

The judgment of the court below is justified and the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles is without merit.

B. In full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, including the following: (a) there are circumstances to consider the motive and background of the crime as to the wrongful argument of sentencing; (b) the damage is minor; (c) the Defendant is old; and (d) the primary offender at the time of committing the crime; and (c) the method and consequence of committing the crime; and (d) the character

The defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. The Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and thus dismissed (the second page of the second page of the judgment of the court below is corrected to “the public notice to the Plaintiff’s Han River Residents’ Representative Meeting” as “the public notice to the Plaintiff’s Han River Residents’ Representative Meeting.”