All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case that the lower court found guilty is as follows.

Defendants are members of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”), and victims E are those who exercise the right of retention.

Defendant

A’s property damage (i) around 10:00 on July 2, 2014, the Defendant removed a banner informing that the Defendant is in the course of exercising the right of retention installed by the victim in 6 front of the F building F in Chungcheong City.

on July 11, 2014, around 09:17, the Defendant removed 6 fronts of the F building and two placards informing that the victim is in the exercise of the right of retention installed at the entrance and entrance, thereby impairing its utility.

On July 10, 2014, at around 08:43, the Defendants removed the banner informing the victim during the exercise of the right of retention from the front and the entrance of the F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. 3, 2014.

around 08:30 on July 16, 2014, the Defendants removed 2 placards informing the victim that they are in the exercise of the right of retention installed at the front and the entrance of the above F building 6 front of and the entrance to the above F building, and displayed 27 pages on the notice attached to the said entrance.

B. The Defendants alleged in the lower judgment to the effect that they were alleged in the grounds of appeal, but the lower court convicted all of the facts charged in the instant case with the following purport.

The summary of the argument is as follows: (i) the Defendants have detached each banner (hereinafter referred to as “the banner of this case”) as stated in the facts constituting the crime established by the victim and returned it again; and (ii) the Defendants do not constitute the crime of damage to property.

The written notice of Paragraph 2 of the facts constituting the crime stated in Do governor (hereinafter “instant notice”) is merely a written statement of the victim’s assertion in the paper A4, and it does not constitute a property subject to the crime of damage to property.

Consolidatedly, the Defendants are arbitrarily decided even though the victims are not legitimate persons of the right of retention.