Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On May 20, 2016, the Defendant damaged 10 copies of the detailed evaluation table of qualification examinations for the selection of housing management business entities, which are owned by the representative meeting of the victim occupants, under custody in the Seocho-gu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, in order not to show 10 copies of the detailed evaluation table of qualification examinations for the selection of housing management business entities, such as construction works and services, to the auditor of the tenant representative meeting.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D, E, and F;

1. Written accusation and accompanying photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (report on the management of apartments and attachment of relevant Acts and subordinate statutes);

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. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The alleged defendant's tear can tear the documents containing facts of crime, or after the selection of the housing manager, etc., it is deemed that the above documents are not necessary, and there was no intention to destroy the tear, and the above documents do not constitute the object of the crime of damage because they cannot be deemed to be invalid.

2. In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant intentionally teared the documents to be recorded in the facts constituting a crime, and that the said documents constitute the object of the crime of destruction because they contain the necessary matters in law or social life.

The defendant and defense counsel are without merit.

A. On May 19, 2016, around 19:30, the respective representatives prepared a detailed evaluation table for the qualification review system (hereinafter “each document of this case”) in order to select housing management business entities and cleaning service business entities in the office of the resident representative meeting of the apartment complex (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”).

B. The former Housing Act (amended by Act No. 13474, Aug. 11, 2015)