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

1. On January 26, 2018, around 13:16, 2018, the Defendant: (a) found the community hall located in Jeonyang-gun B; (b) found the victim C-owned DNA cargo vehicles parked therein; and (c) destroyed the said cargo vehicle by putting two parts of the above cargo vehicles in his/her hand.

2. On January 29, 2018, at around 14:03, the Defendant: (a) confirmed the Victim C’s house located in Jeonyang-gun E, Namyang-gun, with no place in the house; and (b) removed two lids from the ground floor of the victim’s resistance lids owned by the victim; and (c) destroyed and damaged salt makers’ gas injections.

3. On February 1, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 16:35 on February 1, 2018, the Victim G, the wife of the said F, parked at the said place, destroyed the Defendant’s Hacco-owned, also with the wheels front right side of the cargo vehicle, by a fiff, with the fiff.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the defendant's legal statement (any damage to lids from among paragraphs (1) and (2) of the facts of crime);

1. Each legal statement of witness I, C and G;

1. Each police statement made to C, G, and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a community hall, CCTV closure photograph or output output by each day;

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. It is reasonable to increase the fine for a summary order in light of the following: (a) the method of punishment by which the criminal act was committed is interviewed by the planned crime of sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act; and (b) the frequency of the crime reaches three times; (c) the frequency of the crime was not recovered from damage; and (d) some of the crimes were not avoided while denying the crime, and thus, the fine for a summary