One shall not argue for the first time about duration of harm before the court of cassation, also since the harm caused by car painting still exists and that the authorization issued by the qualified authorities does not prevent its removal, the appellate court rightfully supported the appealed decision when it established from the prior appeal decision and the testimony of witnesses and the assigned legal expert report, which concluded that the appellant went back to the shop after the implementation of authorities’ decision and made the same harm. Thus, the Court decision was well founded and did not breach any right of defense, which makes the two defenses unworthy of consideration.