beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: from around 10:00 on August 31, 2013 to around 11:00 on the same day, the Defendant was well aware of the repair of trees at the two risk owned by the victim D, planted in the vicinity of the C in order to enter a charnel.
2. The Defendant asserts that, at the time stated in the facts charged, he was placed in a charnel in the vicinity of the D-owned land, the D-owned land was not cut off, and that there was no satisfe at the risk of the D-owned land.
According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it can be acknowledged that at the two risk of trees owned by D around August 2013, the defendant was well aware of the fact, but evidence that the defendant was well aware of the above two risk of trees is only a statement in D investigative agencies and in this court.
However, D did not consistently state the area and number of trees at the risk of the damage on the day of the instant case, and stated that the Defendant died of all the Defendant’s cultivated products, such as approximately 400 mar trees and sublim trees at the risk of using medicine, improvement and saws for several years. It seems that the Defendant neglected the damage or suffered all the damage.
D has been unable to see that the defendant had been well aware of the tree at the risk of the defendant in the investigative agency, and this court also made a statement that the defendant had not been well aware of the tree at the risk of the defendant in the upper and the saw.
In addition, we agree with the defendant's vindication that the defendant did not enter the land owned by D because he did not regard the vehicle on the access road crossing the land owned by D on the day of the case.
In full view of this, there is no evidence to prove that D's statement is difficult to believe or otherwise there is no other evidence to prove that D's statement was well-known at the risk of D's own.
Therefore, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, is acquitted by the latter part of Article 325.