The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the Defendant had no entrance set up and damaged a locking system as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that convicted the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, credibility is recognized in the victim’s statement to the effect that the Defendant destroyed and damaged the locking system of the entrance of the management office.

Therefore, the court below did not err by misapprehending the facts.

The injured party, in order to prevent the accused from entering the apartment management office under the control of the injured party from entering the court of the court below, and the accused opened the door door and damaged the locking system, and reported the accused to 112.

Comparedly made statements.

Defendant also reported 112 at the time of the instant case and tried to open a door to the police officer who was called out, although he did not have damaged the locking device.

the statement was made.

In addition, the defendant entered the apartment management office in the investigative agency, and the victim went to the apartment management office, and again entered the office to get back.

was stated.

Other images of “on-site photographs submitted by the injured party” (Evidence No. 7) and “on-site photographs” (Attachment No. 13) are also consistent with the statements of the injured party.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.