The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. On February 24, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 07:57 on February 24, 2018, at the entrance door of the building C in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant damaged the property worth KRW 50,000 of the repair cost by cutting off the entrance door of the victim owned by the Defendant among city expenses due to the management and non-management costs.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion is that the Defendant did not have committed an act, such as cutting off the victim’s office entrance door, cutting off the knife, etc., as stated in the facts charged.

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, that is, around February 24, 2018, the date of the instant case, at around 08:24, the Defendant sent the door to the victim and reported it to 112, and the victim was repairer on the day of the instant case, and the victim was repairer who actually opened his house door to the victim, there is doubt as to whether the Defendant did not damage the victim’s house door, such as written in the facts charged, as indicated in the facts charged.

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, it is difficult to believe that the statement to the effect that corresponds to the facts charged by the victim and E is true, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to establish that the defendant damaged the entrance door of the victim as stated in the facts charged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt by the judge.

It is insufficient to view it, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

① The victim stated in the investigative agency that “the Defendant was repaired on the ground that the front door does not open up with the increase in the number of the doors above the front door.” The victim stated that “(the repairer’s repairer’s repairer’s repairer’s repairer’s repairer’s repairer’s repairer’s repairer’s gate and wall, and the key is not sufficient.”

“The part destroyed by making a statement to the effect that “ was added to a new statement.”