The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is "B" of the LAF, which purchased the land in Busan Shipping Daegu C in 2012.

A victim D is a representative director of the Dispute Resolution E and has been exercising a lien in the same site before the purchase.

1. Around April 15, 2015, the Defendant destroyed the building by removing the banner during the exercise of the lien by the victim at the construction site of the main complex building in the said site at the construction site of the main complex building in the building site at the bar, around April 15, 2015.

2. At around April 2, 2015, the Defendant destroyed the banner of the exercise of the right of retention, which the victim installed on the pents of the above construction site, by cutting off the banner in the course of the exercise of the right of retention, around April 18, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

[Article 1] - (Evidence Records No. 18880 of 2015)

1. Partial statement made by the defendant in this Court;

1. Statement of statement on D prepared by the police;

1. Entry into the records of seizure prepared by the police;

1. Videos of banner photographs (Evidence No. 19), [the points of No. 2 on board] - (Evidence Records No. 9076 on board) (Evidence Records No. 2015);

1. Partial statement made by the defendant in this Court;

1. Statement of statement on D prepared by the police;

1. Application of each video statute of the field photograph (Evidence No. 13, 14 pages)

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the same Act concerning the applicable criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Penalty surcharge of 600,000 won to be suspended (a fine of 300,000 won to be imposed for each crime under paragraphs (1) and (2) at the time of sale shall be imposed respectively);

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won a day);

1. Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence (Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 59 (1) of the Act provides that the criminal defendant seems to have caused the crime of this case in order to prevent the victim from exercising an unfair right of retention, the criminal defendant who has agreed smoothly with the victim, and the defendant has no