Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the fine shall be 100.

Punishment of the crime

Around January 6, 2015, the Defendant was a director of F Co., Ltd. established for the purpose of housing redevelopment, and the said company purchased 199,111 square meters of G land located in Bocheon-si and conducted a procedure to establish a district unit plan to build a factory site or a housing site. However, on the above land, three containers owned by the victim H, etc., three prefabricated buildings, two prefabricated-type printing teams, and four plastic hangars were installed without permission.

From August 7, 2015 to August 11, 2015, the Defendant instructed I, a removal business entity, to remove containers, two assembly-type buildings, and vinyl hangars, which are installed on the said land, destroyed and damaged them. The Defendant stolen the goods listed in the list of crimes in the attached Table, such as the introduction of the market price (a total of 47,454,583 won) stored in the warehouse by the said I.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement at H's court hearing;

1. The scene of each police statement to H and J, and photographs of damaged articles;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the head of the complaint, the investigation report on the list of damaged articles (in the case of a commercial person I), the investigation report (in the case of a commercial person I), the report on processing (in the case of a report attached to 112), the report on processing, the investigation report (in the case of an electrical charge payment statement), the report on the

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Articles 329 and 366 of the Criminal Act, and selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by this court for conviction and sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, the Defendant is deemed to have been aware of the existence of separate owners of prefabricated-type buildings and goods stored on the ground of the instant land at the time of the occurrence of the instant case. Nevertheless, the Defendant is against the instant land.