The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Each of the facts charged in this case.

1. The lower court convicted the Defendant of both the damage of property and assault, which is the facts charged of the instant case, and sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

The defendant appealed on the whole judgment of the court below on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles and misunderstanding of sentencing, and the judgment prior to returning was dismissed.

Therefore, the Defendant appealed on the ground of misunderstanding of facts as to the damage of property on the ground of misunderstanding of legal principles, and the Supreme Court did not have any ground of appeal as to the crime of assault, but there is an error of law by misunderstanding legal principles as to a justifiable act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the damage of property. Since the crime of assault, which was found guilty prior to the destruction of property and the return of property, was sentenced to a single sentence in the court below on the ground that the crime of assault, which was found guilty of the first sentence of Article 37 of the Criminal Act

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although misunderstanding of the legal doctrine (property damaged part) was found to have removed placards and public notices attached to the wall of the instant building, or taken them by cutting off the notices cited by the victim, it was an act in the process of preventing the victim, who is the owner of the instant building, from exercising his/her right of retention.

Therefore, even if the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to a legitimate act.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (hereinafter “the penalty”) is too unreasonable.

3. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles

A. On November 15, 2012, the Defendant: (a) on November 15, 2012, on the first floor of Seongbuk-gu Seoul D Building, 5404 and 5405; and (b) on the part of the Defendant built the said building.