The defendant is a constructor who has been awarded a contract for construction works for housing site formation of D and four lots.

At around 10:00 on September 1, 2014, the Defendant cut off plastic water pipes (hereinafter “instant water pipes”) that supply drinking water to F residents in the Siljin-si, including E, on the ground that the water pipes laid underground in the above land interfere with the construction.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the water-supply facilities that supply public drinking water and made it unusable.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the photograph and investigation report related to the case (to hear the telephone statements of persons related to the Village Waterworks Committee);

1. Article 195 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as the following grounds for sentencing):

1. Six months of imprisonment to be suspended;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (restatement of the grounds for sentencing below) of the suspended sentence

1. The gist of the assertion is the private water supply pipes installed without permission against the landowner’s will, and the Defendant requested several times for the relocation of the instant water supply pipes for the construction of housing site from June 2014 to the competent administrative agency, but no response was made. However, the Defendant sent the content-certified mail demanding voluntary removal on September 1, 2014 because it was asked by the competent administrative agency for the purpose of construction of housing site, but did not dispose of on the ground that it was private water, and then cut off the instant water supply pipes.

Residents using the instant water pipe have been supplied with water at the latest on the day of the instant case, and connecting the water pipe by themselves with the water supply pipe on September 4, 2014. Thus, the suspension of water supply due to the cutting of the instant water pipe is only a few hours.

Therefore, in this case, there is no infringement of the legal interest and protection of the law expected in the crime of water supply.