Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person engaged in agriculture.

On February 15, 2013, the Defendant: (a) obtained the victim’s permission on the ground that there was an increase in the number of saw trees owned by the victim E, which are planted in D, Jin-si, Jin-si on 10:00; (b) obtained the victim’s permission on the ground that there was an increase in the number of dry field; and (c) used the said saw trees using mechanical saws with F, and used it as related to F.

Accordingly, the Defendant destroyed the victim's market value of KRW 9,00,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each statement of witness E and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (referring to submission of photographs of trees and telephone communications);

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

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

1. On January 29, 2013, the Defendant asserted that, on the part of the Defendant’s assertion of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, around February 15, 2013, the Defendant cut off the said trees together with F on February 15, 2013, the victim was able to be cut off, and the victim was able to recover at his/her own house and live in the vicinity of the victim’s home (hereinafter “the instant trees”).

The following facts are acknowledged based on the evidence revealed earlier: ① The victim has no reason to labels of the instant trees that are being planted adjacent to his own house, while the defendant, on the other hand, has profesced the number of the instant trees even prior to the instant case on the ground that there is an increase in the number of the instant trees in the dry field in the name of the defendant, adjacent to the residence of the victim, and ② The victim has been laid off the number of the instant trees without his own permission even before the instant case. However, even before the instant case, the victim had been laid off the number of the instant trees without his own permission, thereby preventing the dispute between the defendant and the Defendant on the last day of January 2009.