2. The defendant does not pay the above fine.

The defendant is a person who asserts right to possess farmland in C at the time of truth, and the victim D is a owner of the farmland in question.

1. On April 11, 2016, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the Victim D (Woo, 67 years old) by digging off the embankment accumulated with this soil from the boundary of Jin-si, Jin-si at a low time on April 11, 2016.

2. On April 12, 2016, the Defendant, at around 14:00 on April 12, 2016, extracted from the farmland located in Jin-si, about 14:00, about 20gs, 10gs, 20gs, 20gs, 20gs, 10gs, 20gs, 20gs, and 80gs ( market price of KRW 400,00) from the farmland located in Jin-si, the Defendant destroyed the Defendant’s farmland, which is the owner of the farmland.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. A certified copy of register;

1. Each receipt [The defense counsel and the defendant asserted that the trees damaged by the defendant under Paragraph 2 of the criminal facts stated in the judgment below are less than 30 g, but the defendant's legal statement and each receipt can be acknowledged under Paragraph 2 of the criminal facts stated in the judgment. Thus, the defense counsel and the defendant's assertion cannot be accepted.]

Application of Statutes

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

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

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 concerning the order of provisional payment;