An application filed by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

At around 12:15 on May 2, 2013, the Defendant opened a 304 entrance where the victim B did not correct the gap of the victim’s room, and opened a counter where the victim B did not correct it, and cut off with one set of COPAC (COPAC) No. 800,000 at the victim’s market price on the book.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Application of statutes, such as photographs of damaged articles;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 329 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Determination of the same sentence as the order shall be made in consideration of the fact that there is a history of being sentenced once a fine, once a suspended sentence, three times a suspended sentence, and three times a sentence due to the same type of crime for sentencing (inasmuch as the scope of liability for compensation is unclear, it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation in the criminal procedure) under Articles 32(1) and (2), and 25(3)3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Dismissal, etc. of Application for Compensation Order, and that the defendant cannot be identified at present without summons of the court