If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

1. On October 29, 2014, the Defendant damaged property, on October 29, 2014, purchased a house located in the victim D (n, 67 years old) on the 1st floor, Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul around October 29, 2014, and installed a brick to the entrance of the toilet, and argued that it is a common toilet, and that the wall is not stored.

At the same time, the brick was built and the brick was lowered and the non-repair of the repair cost was damaged.

2. On November 7, 2014, the Defendant continued to damage property, around November 23:38, 2014, putting the brick on the same place as above, and putting the brick on the wall he saw up, thereby damaging an aesthetic wall on the repair cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Recording of witness D and E's statements in the third public trial records;

1. On-site inspection records of this court;

1. A photograph damaged by a suspect A on November 7, 2014;

1. Suppression photographs;

1. A certificate for all matters to be registered;

1. Application of the video-related Acts and subordinate statutes to which victims and children submitted voluntarily by the F;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines for criminal facts;

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. The Defendant’s defense counsel’s assertion on the Defendant’s defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that D’s defense counsel was resistanceed to prevent the co-owners of the instant house from doing construction while destroying the toilets used jointly by them, which is a legitimate act that does not violate social rules, since it was an act for the public interest.

According to the evidence of the judgment, the following facts are as follows: the three-story roof of brick structure and mentor block block structure of the Seoul, Dongjak-gu Seoul, and the three-story roof of cement block structure, its affiliated buildings, and the 23 co-ownership of 23 persons, including the defendant and D; the part of D resident is 2m 10cm wide and 5m 60cm long (the problem is the toilet).