beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.02.06 2017고정1282

재물손괴

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 22, 2017, around 19:39, the Defendant: (a) parked DNA car owned by the injured party C (21) Egypt (21) on the street prior to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Gwangjin-ro 44-Do 32 Plux Park, on the ground that the Defendant illegally parked a DNA car owned by the injured party C (21) Egypt (21) in this letter, attached a paper attached a “stop parking prohibition” to the front of the driver’s seat of the said car so that the front of the driver’s seat of the said car changes in glass and cut off a hole.

As a result, the Defendant destroyed the glass of the said car managed by the injured party to require approximately KRW 200,000 for repair costs, and damaged its utility.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of crime scene;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act concerning the confinement of a workhouse (the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that the Defendant and the defense counsel have lost their utility temporarily due to the instant crime only.

In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, i.e., the owner of a vehicle:

E was a change in the glass of the vehicle

was stated and thus exchanged in favor of the person.

Specifically, the victim made a statement to the police, and ② at the time of reporting to the police, the victim had been licked to the glass.

In full view of the facts stated, the above assertion is without merit.

The sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the sentencing conditions shown in the trial of this case, such as the fact that the defendant with the reason of sentencing has no record of criminal punishment for the same crime, and the damage has not been recovered but is relatively minor.