Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

The Defendant is serving as the chief of office in the “D cafeteria” of the first floor of the building owned by the victim C in Seopopopo City B.

On July 9, 2016, from around 20:0 to around 12:00 on July 10, 2016, the Defendant destroyed and damaged the number of employees, such as kyl trees, bamboo trees, pine trees, coco-owners, pine trees, small iron franchising trees, franchising trees, franchising trees, and flusium trees in flusium trees, which are considered around the above restaurant, for the landscaped gardening of the market value, which is the victim's possession, located around the above restaurant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement protocol against C and E;

1. Application of photographs, photographs, investigative reports, and statutes on site photographs submitted by the defendant's novels;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts, the choice of fines, and the choice of fines (the defendant sent trees to the defendant on July 9, 2016 and on July 10, 2016, it is deemed that two crimes of destroying property are established on each day).

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. Taking into account the circumstances leading up to the crime of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the form of trees, etc. which are well known from the evidence as indicated in the judgment, the fact that the defendant well paid the trees without the victim’s permission, and reflects the fact that the defendant paid the trees without the victim’s permission