The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the legal principles, the Defendant committed the instant crime, because the executives and employees of the victimized school were harassing the Defendant by rashing the Defendant through rash, radiation, or audience for the purpose of harming the Defendant, and thus, constitutes a justifiable act.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the fine of 1.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The determination of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to what act does not violate the social norms and thus, whether illegality is excluded should be determined on an individual basis by taking into account the following circumstances: (i) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (ii) reasonableness of the means or method of the act; (iii) balance of the benefits of protection and infringement; (iv) urgency; and (v) supplementary nature that there is no other means or method other than the act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do3305 Decided May 27, 2010, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant can be acknowledged as having damaged property by making a flag in the wall of the damaged school, as stated in the facts charged, and the circumstance that the defendant actually occurred as alleged by the defendant at the time of committing the instant crime is not verified. Thus, it cannot be viewed as a justifiable act that does not violate the social rules, as it satisfies the requirements for legitimacy, reasonableness, balance, urgency, supplement, etc.

Therefore, the defendant's argument on this point is without merit.

B. The fact that the defendant committed an offense on the assertion of unfair sentencing is led to confession and reflects his mistake, and the defendant has the ability or will to discern things due to the lost disability in which the cause is unknown.