1. On April 25, 2018, the Defendant committed the crime at around April 25, 2018, at the “E” business establishment operated by the victim D in Osan-si, U.S., on April 25, 2018, the Defendant destroyed 1.30,000 won in repairing the entrance locking device of the entrance, which is the victim’s possession, by putting the door of the said marina business establishment lock up with the bricks, which are dangerous things in front of the building.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and damaged the victim's property.

2. On May 1, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 04:48 on May 1, 2018, at the places indicated in the foregoing paragraph (1); (b) laid down bricks, which are dangerous objects that were previously possessed without any justifiable reason, to repair CCTVs installed therein; and (c) destroyed the CCTV cameras, which are owned by the victim; (d) 1.50,000 won in repairing the said CCTVs; and (e) laid down the entrance and the advertisement, etc., which are dangerous objects, in hand, caused the entrances owned by the victim to be 2.50,000 won in repairing expenses; and (e) destroyed the entrances owned by the victim by putting the entrance and the advertisement, etc. on hand.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and damaged the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Each written statement of D;

1. A report on the occurrence of a loss;

1. Written estimate of damage;

1. Each investigation report (to attachCCTV video images, to the scene of the crime, to investigate CCTV, and to submit a estimate of damage);

1. At each damaged scene and photographs of damaged articles;

1. [See April 25, 2018] Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter 1 to Chapter

1. Relevant Article 369 of the Criminal Act and Articles 369 (1) and 366 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment for the crime;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes, the Defendant’s argument is a finite that the injured party would find his finite to the Defendant through the “any machine” located in the said finite business place, and if so, her finite and finite.