The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Defendant A (the age of 80 per person) of the facts charged is a person without a certain occupation, and the Defendant is a victim C (the age of 57 per party) who repairs and sells singing machines from 1998 to lease the building and is receiving monthly rent.

Although the defendant got monthly to the victim, there was a fact that the victim's wife told the defendant that "no one has increased," the victim's wife stated that "no one has raised any money."

On October 20, 201, from around 11:00 to around 11:00 on November 11, 201 of the same year, the Defendant removed one acrylic signboard equivalent to 200,000 won at the market price attached to the columns of the building owned by the victim for the foregoing reasons, and attached the “lease” card at that place.

Accordingly, the Defendant destroyed the signboards by impairing their utility.

Reasons for innocence

1. Around June 4, 1998, the Defendant leased the instant store to the victim, and the victim did not pay only rent until October 31, 201, and did not pay the difference from November 1, 201.

On June 1, 2012, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the victim for the name of the building.

On October 4, 2012, the aggrieved party filed a counterclaim against the Defendant for the payment of damages, asserting that “the Defendant interfered with business activities, such as removing and damaging signboards without permission, and caused business losses,” against the Defendant on November 19, 2012.

2. Unlike the above, the victim’s statement in this Court 9, 17 pages of the investigation record of the victim’s assertion and in this Court. Unlike the above, this case appears to have occurred after the lapse of a considerable period of time after the delay of the victim’s rent, and this case appears to have occurred after the lapse of such period. The 12th page of the investigation record, as well as before the defendant’s act

In light of the above circumstances and the process of the above civil disputes and the circumstances leading up to the complaint of this case, the statement by the defendant who committed an act identical to the facts charged with the consent of the victim is sufficient.