The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of mistake 1) The Defendant is a C apartment in which the Defendant resides (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

2) As a result, in order to attract a string of the rooftop, a smoke pipe installed to prevent a smokestack does not have to be ventilated, a part of the following parts was cut off to the extent that it was opened to the extent of 3 parts of the arching strings, which did not be removed and damaged. 2) In addition, the Defendant only opened the string boundary of the apartment of this case into the ground by using a string to make the string boundary of the apartment of this case easily seen, and there was no fact that the string boundary of the strings was broken off by the string boundary.

B. Even if the lower court found the Defendant guilty of unfair sentencing, the lower court’s punishment (fine of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. In recognition of the criminal intent of the destruction of property, the part 1 of the arche grasium is not necessarily planned with the intention of the damage or actively wishing to damage the property against the owner's will, and there is awareness about the loss of the utility of property against the owner's will. Here, "the utility of property" constitutes not only the act of making it impossible to be used for the original purpose of use of the property but also the act of converting it into a state in which it is temporarily unusable (see Supreme Court Decision 93Do2701, Dec. 7, 1993). 2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below found that the defendant was not opened the arche 5 grasium to prevent the chimney of the apartment rooftop of this case on May 2013, and it also stated that the defendant was not opened to the arche grase grasium, and accordingly, it conforms to the evidence submitted (Evidence evidence, ② the victim was submitted to the defendant on his 131.5 gra.