The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

However, the period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The misunderstanding of the facts or legal principles decided to remove the boundary stone and booms of the instant case (hereinafter “the boundary stone, etc.”) from before several months before the instant case occurred, and then voluntarily consented to the removal of the Defendant, and even if the removal was not approved, the victim did not consent.

Even if the defendant obtained the above consent, the above boundary stone was removed by mistake.

In addition, the boundary stone of this case was installed without permission of the landowner and was subject to removal of interference.

Therefore, the defendant's act cannot be punished because it constitutes an act of obtaining the consent of the victim, an act of a political party, which is justified, or an act of damage to property without the intention of damage.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine the determination of the misapprehension of the legal principles on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the defendant accepted voluntary removal of the boundary stone of this case from the injured party.

However, in light of the content of the Defendant’s content verification, text message, etc., there was a dispute over the victim’s land use area, the installation and location of a temporary building and a boundary stone, compensation issues for water on the ground, etc. from around 2015, and the victim seems to have continuously disputed the Defendant’s request for restitution. In light of the aforementioned circumstances, there was a justifiable reason to believe that the Defendant had consented to the Defendant’s voluntary removal of the boundary stone of this case, etc.

The defendant and the defense counsel are also difficult to see. ③ The defendant and the defense counsel are liable for the payment of rent for the victim from this case to this case.