If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

1. On September 24, 2018, the Defendant: (a) destroyed property damage by a victim C (the age of 49) (the victim C) who operated an Ortoba in front of the Mababa in front of the Maba-si on the street around 20:20 on September 24, 2018, was able to have his/her mobile phone on his/her market value deducted from his/her possession by hand; and (b) destroyed the repair cost by cutting off the Ortoba in front of the Maba-si.

2. The Defendant assaulted the victim at the above date, place, and the victim’s head head head to drink, booming the victim’s body, and pushing the victim’s body.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. A written statement of victim C;

1. Data of photographs of damaged dives/tobs;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines for a crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37 and Article 38 (1) 2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant committed the instant crime even though he had multiple violent crimes, and did not agree with the victim.

However, it is recognized that there is some favorable circumstances for the defendant, such as the confession of the crime of this case and the fact that there is no previous conviction sentenced to the past punishment, etc. The defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of all factors of sentencing as shown in the arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after