The judgment below

Defendant A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, and K respectively.

Defendant

A, B, D, E, F, G, H.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact that the Defendants removed notices such as the entry in the facts charged by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles at the time and place of the entry in the facts charged.

However, the contents of the above notices are false, and the defendant did not have the legitimate management director of the apartment of this case at the time when the above notices were permitted to be posted. In such a situation, the defendants' arbitrary removal of the above notices against others constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (Defendant F and D: each fine of KRW 500,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

2. Determination

A. If a document in a judgment of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is destroyed against the owner’s will, even if there is a dispute about the name, and the document contains a false statement contrary to the truth, it cannot be deemed as the document which is the object of the crime of destruction of document.

(2) Article 21 of the Criminal Act provides that “The purpose of self-defense is to establish self-defense under Article 21 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 82Do1807, Dec. 28, 1982; 82Do1807, Dec. 26, 2002; 2003Do300, Sept. 26, 2003; 2003Do300, Sept. 26, 2003).”