The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding, the defendant did not have any money on the part of the damaged victim's vehicle, and there is no credibility of the victim's statement, and the court below recognized that the defendant damaged the victim's vehicle. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of

B. In light of the fact that the degree of damage to vehicles by the victims of unfair sentencing is minor, the lower court’s punishment (fine 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In order to confirm the phone number left in the vehicle and to verify whether there is a person on the vehicle, the Defendant was merely left in the body of the vehicle, and there was no money in the lower part of the gas station, penter, and the lower part of the auxiliary seat, which is the part of the damaged vehicle. As the victim did not consider the issue regarding the damage of the vehicle at the place of the case, the Defendant did not have any damage to the victim. However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated at the lower court, the Defendant’s above defense is difficult to believe as it is and the Defendant’s act of destroying and damaging the property of this case is recognized.

1) The victim parked the car from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and returned to the fireworks at other places. The victim also found a flicking flick in the vehicle oil station and flick part of the pentel, and found a flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flicking flick flicking