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

On March 28, 2014, at least 09:00 to 12:00, the Defendant: (a) was planted on the land purchased by the Defendant through a court auction; (b) was unable to reach an agreement on the disposal of trees not included in the subject of sale because it did not correspond to the land; (c) was destroyed by the Defendant’s direct disposal of the said land; and (d) was destroyed by the victim D-owned pine trees (return), 400 weeks, 10 weeks, 9 weeks, and 1 non-frequency one share.

Summary of Evidence

The defendant's partial statement, witness Eul's statement in the third protocol of trial, F's statement in the fourth protocol of trial, F's certificate, field photo, auction information, auction case search, appraisal report and fact inquiry inquiry letter [this case trees are annexed to land attached by legitimate title of the victim (E, for whom comprehensive delegation from F is made by the land owner, permission for the use of land without fixing a period from the victim on February 2, 2007). It belongs to the victim's ownership as an independent thing separate from the land (see the proviso of Article 256 of the Civil Act). Further, the defendant knew that the trees of this case were not included in the object of sale in the auction of the land of this case, and the victim did not reach an agreement with the victim on the treatment of trees with knowledge that the trees of this case were owned by the victim, and thus, it is sufficiently recognized that the damage of property was done. Meanwhile, the defendant argued about the quantity and unit price of pine trees in the auction procedure, but it can be acknowledged that the appraisal report of this case and inquiry about the quantity of pine trees of this case.

1. Relevant Articles 366 (Selection of Punishment of Fines)

2. Articles 70(1) and 69(2)3.