If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

The Defendant is the owner of the first floor multi-family (69.76m2) under the Jung-gu, Ulsan Metropolitan City.

The defendant had a mind that windows should be installed in the underground floor and the first floor space on the ground on the ground that the above multi-protection building is located in the underground floor and does not have a ventilation.

In April 2012, the Defendant removed a flower (breadth x 1m x 8m in length x 0.6m in height) installed on the ground of the shopping mall at the end of the end of April 2012, and removed the outer wall of the underground floor by the size of the window frame (area 0.5m in length x 1m in length x 2 place).

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the flower and the outer wall of the underground floor, which is the above CBD common area.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a petition for complaint, a certified copy of each register, building register, site photograph, and written petition;

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

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

1. As to the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that: (a) the Defendant committed an act identical to that stated in the facts charged (hereinafter “instant act”); (b) but, as a matter of preventing the dampness and corrosion of a building, there was no intention to destroy and damage property; and (c) thereby, they did not harm the external wall of the building and its effectiveness

The crime of causing property damage under Article 366 of the Criminal Code is established when the property of another person is damaged or concealed, or when the utility thereof is harmed by other means. The term "conscising the utility of property" refers to making the property in a state in which it is virtually impossible to provide it for its original purpose of use due to an appraisal, and includes making the property in a state in which it cannot be used temporarily

In particular, whether it constitutes a harming the utility of a structure or not shall be the use and function of the structure, and such an act shall be the structure.