The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The defendant of mistake of facts is not more than the removal of toilet walls in the judgment of the court below and not more than the removal of this case, with the permission of G from the representative who was delegated with respect to the whole business of remodeling construction (hereinafter "the remodeling construction of this case") and sale as stated in the judgment of the court below by the victim.

(2) As a result, the lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two months of imprisonment and two years of suspension of execution) is unreasonable because it is so far as it did not infringe on a structure, and there is no intention to infringe on a structure, and there is no intention to damage property. (b) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment and two years of suspension of execution) is unreasonable. Notwithstanding the absence of new disclosure of objective grounds that may affect the formation of a documentary evidence in the process of the trial, the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts was conducted ex post facto and ex post facto determination, there should be reasonable circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination was clearly erroneous, or that the argument leading to the fact-finding is considerably unreasonable due to the violation of logical and empirical rules, and without such exceptional circumstances, the lower court’s determination on the fact-finding of the first instance court should not be followed without permission, and based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court did not have any reasonable ground to see that the lower court’s determination was legitimate and reasonable.

except that the following judgments shall be added:

Additional decision G refers to the defendant at the court of the original instance.