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

1. Around 13:15 on December 22, 2019, when the Defendant was running a bus for the C branch line affiliated with B B, the Defendant publicly insultingd the victim by openly obscing the victim with a large voice to the effect that “Is the victim’s victim F (35 years of age) driving, which was operated on the left side in the course of changing the car line from the front side of the E Hospital located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, to turn to the left to the water basin.” As a result, it was obvious that the date of the accident was obvious and obvious, it would be possible for the victim to turn to the left, while the number of unspecified bus customers are under their supervision.”

2. The Defendant causing property damage, like the foregoing 1. In the indictment, in which the amount of the repair cost is influenced by in his/her hand, one of the Cubs Alblings installed in the G Otoba, which the said victim operated, is “70,000 won of the repair cost.”

However, according to the following evidence, it is recognized that the defendant's display of the above animals by putting the above animals, etc. and opened and closed them, and the cost of replacing the original ones with a partial reduction of their utility and the new ones is about 700,000, but it is not possible to repair them without replacing them with all evidence submitted by the prosecutor, even if they are based on all evidence submitted by the prosecutor.

It is difficult to recognize that more than 700,000 won is required to do so, and no evidence was submitted as to how much expenses are needed to repair the above body without replacing the above body, and considering the process of the hearing in this case, it does not create any disadvantage to the defendant's right of defense even if this part of the facts charged is recognized as "a large repair cost is to be borne" without any amendment to the indictment. Thus, it is recognized ex officio as above.

The property of the victim was damaged.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the defendant;