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

The Defendant owned 9 points of goods equivalent to 2.60,00 won in the market price of smart TV from 101 Dong 201 to 201, the Defendant’s residence of the Defendant in Gwangju City.

On September 3, 2015, 2015, the enforcement officer D, who belongs to the Incheon District Court's Busan District Court's branch, entrusted the execution of creditor E, seized the above goods at the defendant's home and attached a seizure mark on the goods.

Nevertheless, on July 15, 2016, the Defendant arbitrarily removed the attachment indication from the Defendant’s residence, and then damaged the attachment indication performed by the public official under FF 301.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Attachment records of corporeal movables: 2015/2616;

1. Statement that it is impossible to sell each tangible movable;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the seals and photographs of seized goods;

1. Article 140 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 140 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides for the following: (a) the Defendant’s director, etc. was unable to sell movable property for the reason of sentencing; (b) the total value of the seized goods was not so significant; (c) the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) the various sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act stated in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, are determined by comprehensively taking account of the following factors.