Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On June 14, 2018, around 04:25, the Defendant: (a) cut off a banner with the content that “D ” installed by the victim C of the victim C at the Gangnam-gu Seoul re-building site B, Seoul, to the upper end; and (b) destroyed the banner that could not know the market price owned by the said victim.

2. On June 14, 2018, around 04:30 on June 14, 2018, the Defendant: (a) cut two banners from the victim’s street trees near the south of the construction site adjacent to the reconstruction site at the above 4th street trees; and (b) cut off two banners from the victim’s “D to guarantee leased commercial buildings”; and (c) “on the side to the victim, to spread money and goods to the removal, and to the e-mail, to the removalr; and (d) destroyed two banners without knowing

3. On June 22, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 04:15, the street trees located near the bus stops in North Korea on the reconstruction site, which the said victim installed, embarciated against the string of the nation-wide removal.

B The committee on countermeasures against the removal of commercial buildings cut a banner from the content to the upper end, thereby damaging the banner in which the market price on the said victim’s ownership is unknown.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A report on internal investigation (the reproduction of DNA CCTV images), a report on internal investigation (the verification of CCTV data onF apartment buildings), and a report on internal investigation (the verification of CCTV images that have been committed by 6/22);

1. The defendant asserts that there is no fact that a banner was destroyed as stated in the records of seizure and the list of seizure [the defendant] as stated in paragraphs 1 and 2.

According to the CCTV data recorded at the scene of the crime of this case, the identity of the person identified by the CCTV as the surface of the person who destroyed the instant banner (hereinafter “CCTV”). The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, the name, bank, cap, and sar, etc., worn by the Defendant at the time of committing the crime described in paragraph 3, are deemed to be almost the same as the personal seal of CCTV, and the personal seal of CCTV is residing by the Defendant before and after committing the crime.