Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is the owner of the Daegu Southern-gu B underground shopping mall, and the victim C had been laid underground in part of the lower part of the building owned by the Defendant for the reason that the sewage manager of the commercial building was the owner of the building located in Daegu-gu D.

On June 26, 2017, in order to find out the cause of flood damage caused by water erosion, the Defendant cut down the soil covering the sewage pipe with the victim on June 26, 2017.

However, while leaving the sewage pipe repair, etc. without any particular work, the victim's husband E was left unattended for a long period of time on April 7, 2018, the victim's husband E covered the sewage pipe with soil and restored it to its original condition on the ground that it is not good for the aesthetic view, and the defendant, on April 8, 2018, up to 18:00, up to 346,000 won, he loaded the soil covering the sewage pipe on the land owned by the above victim's owner of the above victim's land located in Daegu Southern-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, 201, and caused the damage to the utility of the victim's property by getting the victim's husband E loaded the soil on the Defendant farm, which was loaded into the sewage pipe and disposed of the soil.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Investigation report (in the case of a suspect, on the face of his/her rank);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing recording records;

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. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant's defense attorney's assertion that the defendant's defense counsel did not have the intention of damaging the defendant's act, and it cannot be viewed that the defendant lost the utility of the foundation.

In order to prevent flood damage of the commercial building owned by Defendant, it is an act that constitutes an emergency evacuation.

2. Determination

A. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court:

1. The sewage manager of the commercial building owned by the defendant is the victim.