The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of 1,00,000 won, and a fine of 70,000 won, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts (with regard to the point of damage) (1) Defendant A was merely in the process of getting out of Defendant B’s assault and sprink, and there was no intention that Defendant B’s Titts and handouts would damage the said Titts and handouts.

② Defendant B’s video blickphones with a longer Handphone and stimulates Defendant A, and Defendant A cited by Defendant B for the purpose of identifying the above video.

In the process of changing the Handphone and cutting down the Handphone, only the Handphone was reduced.

Defendant

A intentionally does not fall or throw down the handphone of Defendant B on the floor in order to damage the handphone.

2) The lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (misunderstanding of facts) Defendant B did not assault Defendant B, as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

2) The damaged point (1) Defendant B did not have any damage by putting the discharge of Defendant A.

② The discharge of this case does not constitute the object of the crime of damage to property owned by Defendant B.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts A A1, Defendant A may be recognized as the intention of damage.

Defendant

A’s above assertion is rejected.

① After the completion of Defendant B’s assault, Defendant A may recognize the fact of having inflicted an injury upon Defendant B (the 155th page of the investigation record, the first screen that Defendant B submitted). Defendant A merely exceeded the acts to defend Defendant B’s assault and scam, and Defendant B was in aggressive with Defendant A’s scam during the court of original instance.