The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant is the owner of land E in the facts charged, and the victim F was the owner of land G in Kimhae-si and H, around October 2004, the victim installed a block fence with a length of 85 meters and a height of 170 cm on the boundary line of land G in Kimhae-si, H land and E.

Around April 2008, the Defendant removed the block fence, sealed the container on G and H land, thereby making it difficult to find out the boundary of the land owned by the victim.

2. At the time when the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted on December 13, 2004 sold the E land at the time of Kimhae-si and delivered it around January 20, 2005, the said fence was not installed as indicated in the facts charged (hereinafter “instant fence”) on the land, and there was no removal of the said fence as indicated in the facts charged.

3. On April 2008, there is a statement at the I investigative agency and court, the father of the victim, as evidence that the defendant removed the fence of this case, such as the statement in the facts charged.

(J’s statement in the court, K’s statement in the investigation agency, the J, K, and L’s respective factual certificates [this is also evidence that conforms to the facts charged, but this is only evidence as to when the wall of this case was installed). However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record are as follows: (i) although there was no person who directly collapses the wall of this case in the investigation agency, I stated that the Defendant was released from the wall of this case because the Defendant was using the wall of this case on the land (Records No. 172 page); (ii) in this court, I stated that the Defendant was unsatisfing the wall of this case at any time and by any method; and (iii) in this court, I stated that there was no person to remove the wall of this case; and therefore, (iv) the above I’s statement was made by the presumption that all the Defendant was removed.