Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

On February 3, 2019, the Defendant got assaulted to the victim D (year 54) at the C parking lot located in Sejong-si B on February 15, 2019, and inflicted damage on two sides of the Ei40 car market price, which is owned by the victim who parked there.

[Defendant and defense counsel asserted to the effect that only one copy was damaged by the defendant and defense counsel. However, according to each of the two photographs (such as Investigation Records No. 13, 14) replaced after the crime of this case, it can be confirmed that the number of typists damaged by the defendant and defense counsel can be two. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant and defense counsel cannot be accepted)

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report (including the destruction of and damage to property), investigation report (including photographs related to the case);

1. Article 36 of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. In light of the purpose of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, considering the content of the instant crime and the amount of damage therefrom, and the circumstances in which no agreement was reached, a summary order fine is deemed reasonable even if considering the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the background leading to the crime and the situation in which the damage was repaid or agreed, etc., and there is no change in circumstances that should otherwise be reduced. Thus, the same sentence as the disposition is imposed.