2. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the following facts are as follows: (i) D parked a vehicle in the underground parking lot of the building owned by the Defendant on October 20, 2012; (ii) determined that a person who uses an adjacent express bus terminal without permission was parked because the Defendant discovered the vehicle after the discovery of the vehicle; and (iii) reported that D was unable to operate a vehicle due to a finger car on October 22, 2012; (iv) it was found that the police officer was unable to use the vehicle before the arrival of the vehicle on October 21, 2012; and (v) it was found that the police officer was not able to use the vehicle at the bar on October 22, 2012, and that it was impossible to use the vehicle at the bar before the removal of the vehicle; and (v) it was found that the police officer was not able to use the vehicle at the bar before the removal of the vehicle at the bar on October 23, 2012.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged in accordance with the record, i.e., (i) when the fingers are integrated in the court, D made a statement to the effect that it did not recognize a flabed country when the fingers were flabed, and that the part where the fingers were in contact with the fingers was found to have been flabed. However, according to the video of F at the time of their dispatch (17 pages of investigation records), F was in contact with the part of the vehicle flab.