The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal: misunderstanding of facts;
A. The Defendant only carried out a string of the victim’s car ties by hand, but did not damage the string of the said car by means of goods, and there was no damage to the string of the said car.
B. The repair cost indicated in the facts charged is excessive, including the cost of repairing the damaged ridge part and any non-related part.
2. An ex officio determination prosecutor filed an application for changes in the indictment with the content of “repair Costs of KRW 5,374,160” in the facts charged in the instant case to “Maintenance Costs of KRW 3,604,70,” and the subject of the adjudication was changed by permitting the trial. As such, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.
However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's above argument of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.
3. 1) As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts that there was no damage, the Defendant also asserted that there was a mistake of facts, and the lower court rejected the above assertion on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. Examining the above determination of the lower court by comparison with the evidence duly examined and adopted by the lower court, the lower court’s determination is justifiable and acceptable, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the Defendant. Accordingly, the lower court’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts as to the allegation that there was excessive repair cost is without merit. Accordingly, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined in the lower court and the first instance court, it is recognized that there was a repair cost equivalent to KRW 3,604,70 as stated in the facts charged as modified due to the damage of this case, and the prosecutor instituted a prosecution by recognizing the total amount of KRW 5,374,160 as the repair cost stated in the written estimate (Evidence No. 11) submitted by the first victim