Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On May 4, 2016, around 03:10 around 03:0, the Defendant: (a) extracted one set of boundary posts installed on the road to indicate the boundary of the company’s land in front of the D Company located in Gwangju-si, where the victim is the victim of the Gyeonggi-si; and (b) abandoned it into the river.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to E;

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting a crime and Article 366 of the choice of punishment;

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

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion on the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act alleged that the Defendant’s act of this case was a justifiable act. However, according to the evidence and the records duly adopted and examined by the court, the victim installed posts as a marking to clarify the boundary after conducting a survey of the boundary of the site used as a road around December 2015. The remainder of the road except for the land owned by the victim could sufficiently pass the previous users. The Defendant removed the posts installed by the victim on the ground that the width of the road is narrow and inconvenience, and then shut down at a place where the victim could not easily find them. In light of the above, it cannot be deemed that the above act by the Defendant’s aforementioned act was a justifiable act with objective validity that can be accepted in light of social norms.

Therefore, the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is without merit.