When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On August 22, 2015, the Defendant stated in the facts charged as follows: (a) on the ground that the victim E was driven by a vehicle in the Dial pension located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, and was taking the Defendant’s steps, the Defendant stated as “under the influence of alcohol and without any justifiable reason.” (b) As above, the Defendant revised the facts charged.

The part of the F vehicle owned by the victim was set off on the part above the main set of the said vehicle, and the part was added to the fences adjacent to the driver's seat due to continuous launch so that the above damaged vehicle was damaged to have approximately KRW 5,828,300 in repair cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to E and G;

1. Investigation report (booms, damaged vehicle photographs, etc.);

1. Written estimate (F);

1. Vehicle photographs;

1. Application of film laws and regulations of black boom CDs;

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting a crime and Article 366 of the choice of punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion regarding the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order

The argument is asserted.

According to the police statement protocol on E, the Defendant destroyed the main set, knife, driver’s knife, back wheeler, etc., and there is no ground to deny the credibility of the above statement (i.e., the whole process of the crime is not limited to the video of black boom CDs), and thus, the Defendant did not destroy any part other than the main set, on the basis of the aforementioned video.

A. In the investigation report (booms, damaged vehicle photographs, etc.), vehicle photographs are more likely to be verified with the rear wheels fences of the damaged vehicle, the front flag, the front door of the driver's seat, or a flag flag, and according to the police statement report on G, G considered that the Defendant was flaging more parts of the driver's seat than the fences of the driver's seat.

The parts mentioned in the letter, quotation (F) shall also be the subject, even with the main set and door, and the credibility of the said letter shall be denied.