The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal revealed that the Defendant, at the time of the instant case, was forced to open the entrance of the instant case, but, at around 23:10 thereafter, it did not operate the said entrance.

In addition, the police made a statement to that effect.

The defendant shall not be deemed to have accepted a written estimate or receipt submitted by the victim by destroying and damaging the entrance.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged erred by misapprehending the facts charged.

2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the records, namely, the defendant opened the door by the police without opening a door even after the opening of the entrance of this case. Compulsory opening of the door, but there was no other action to the effect that it would be possible to find out how the damaged person would be caused by the defendant. The above erroneous opening of the door was forced to open the door (Evidence No. 19-20 of the evidence record). The defendant, as of August 29, 2015, prepared and issued a receipt as to KRW 100,000 of the entrance of this case as of August 29, 2015 (Evidence No. 31 of the evidence record), and the victim's testimony to the effect that the defendant could not use the door of this case without leaving it to repair due to the repair of this case, opening the door door of 100,000 won as of May 25, 200 (Evidence No. 1984 of the charge of this case).

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is justified and there is no error of mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

On the other hand, the court below erred by misapprehending the circumstances of this case.