beta
Text
All appeals by the prosecutor and the defendant are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the fact that the Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, she was found to have set up the door of the conference room in order to compulsorily open the door of the conference room and damaged the door by breaking the door in the cresh, etc., the Defendant, as described in the judgment of the court below, was sentenced by the court below (200,000 won of a fine) is too unfas
B. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the damaged text of the instant case was destroyed with the consent of the owner, and thus, the crime is not committed, or ② the Defendant et al. tried to hold a public hearing at the above conference room, but the former president G et al. did not open the door within the conference room, and thus constitutes a justifiable act. Thus, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of the facts charged of the instant case by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, which affected the conclusion
(2) The sentence (200,000 won) sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the following facts are acknowledged. ① The defendant entered the apartment management office for the purpose of the residents' public hearing along with C, D, and H, which is the apartment resident of the same apartment on April 2, 2012, as argued by the defendant as the president of the council of occupants' representatives. ② The defendant was in the meeting room in the management office, etc., but they did not open the meeting room, and ③ the defendant was included in the drick door and sealed the door in C and D, which eventually led to the meeting room. However, it cannot be acknowledged that there was a legitimate consent of the council of occupants' representatives at the time of the crime of this case.
The defendant is not explicitly punished against the defendant, who is a member of the council of occupants' representatives of the apartment of this case.