beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On April 14, 2017, around 23:28-23:33 around 2017, the Defendant damaged the part of the victim D's top top door and back door of the passenger car owned by the victim D, which was set up at the same parking lot of Daejeon Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, to be KRW 739,781 for repairing costs, such as flabbbing, by flabing the flash with a tool.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. Legal testimony of witness D;
1. CCTV video files CDs;
1. Photographs of damaged vehicles;
1. Written estimate;
1. Each investigation report and internal investigation report (the defendant asserted that there was no flag damage to a damaged vehicle, but this court may find out the following circumstances, i.e., the victim D tried to drive the damaged vehicle on April 14, 2017 by the evidence duly adopted and investigated. Around the same day, the victim D driven the damaged vehicle into the church and parked the damaged vehicle in front of the Daejeon-gu Daejeon Apartment-gu Seoul apartment complex 108 at around 23: (a) again driving the damaged vehicle on April 14, 2017; (b) the damaged vehicle was parked before driving the damaged vehicle; (c) the defendant tried to drive the damaged vehicle on April 11:30, 2014, while leaving the damaged vehicle before driving the towing vehicle, it was difficult to deduct the damaged vehicle from his/her vehicle due to difficulty in investigating the damaged vehicle (the damaged vehicle was also difficult at the time of his/her own inspection.
(A) without the Defendant’s special reason, the fact that the Defendant was in the vicinity of the steering place of the damaged vehicle was in considerable time, and the Defendant was in an investigative agency to the sand president who was in the vicinity of the damaged vehicle in order to throw away the paper cup.
The court stated that the sand president was changed in this court.
Although the statement was replaced, the location of the sand president and the damaged vehicle claimed by the defendant is completely different through the examination of the CCTV images taken around the damaged vehicle.