Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant has a 136 square meters for Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C, and the victim D has the same 89 square meters as the victim's side.

In addition, there was a fenced fence between the above two lands.

On May 28, 2015, around May 28, 2015, the Defendant attached the said fence on the ground that the construction of the three-story building on the land owned by the Defendant was hindered.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the above fence, which is the boundary mark.

[This case’s fence was installed more than 30 years ago and used as a boundary for a long time. The Defendant, knowing such circumstances, made the aforementioned fence unrecognizably recognizable, thereby constituting a crime of aggressioning a boundary.

As claimed by the Defendant, even if the main purpose of installing the aforementioned fence was to prevent crimes and there was a large quantity of money near the fence, such circumstance does not affect the establishment of a crime of aggression.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including the parts concerning D confrontations);

1. An investigation report (to submit a certified copy of the registry and a text message by an complainant);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (report appended to suspect data);

1. Relevant Article 370 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;