The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

Punishment of the crime

On October 30, 2014, the Defendant appealed from the Daegu District Court after having been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively weapons, etc.), but the appeal was dismissed, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 23, 2015.

On April 18, 2014, at around 22:35, the Defendant: (a) found the victim from the Seo-gu Seo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Operation “D Schlage” to find out for the reason that it was difficult for the Defendant to pay credit when he was unable to do so due to the lack of money; and (b) found the victim again to the “D Schlage” on the same day at around 23:30,000 on the same day; and (c) caused the damage by breaking the entrance entrance of KRW 200,000,000, the market price of the victim’s land.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Previous convictions in the judgment: Application of two copies of the judgment [Tgu District Court Decision 2014No4316, Daegu District Court Decision 2014Kadan429, 2014Kadan429, 4769 (Merger)] and one copy of the prosecution case inquiry (Tgu District Court Decision 2014No4316) and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 366 of the Selection of Punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and the former part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes;

1. The latter part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act exempted from punishment (the latter part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act is likely to have been sentenced by a separate fine if the judgment was rendered simultaneously with the case in which it