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

1. On July 25, 2017, the Defendant damaged property by 20,000 won by destroying the glass windows of the entrance door No. 605, which is owned by the victim D, the owner of the public announcement source, using the wooden d's 605 entrance, around 03:30, Ansan-si, Annsan-si, the 605th floor of Annsan-si, the 5th floor of Annsan-si, the 605th floor of Annsan-si.

2. Whether the Defendant violated the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act of 05:00 on July 25, 2017, in the state of alcohol within the 's private district located in 175 (Salybaly), Saccinal, Saccinal, Saccinal, Saccinal, Saccinal, Saccinal, Saccinal, and Saccinal, Saccinal, Saccinal, and Saccinal, Saccinal, Saccin

For about 30 minutes by avoiding disturbance, such as humping a large amount of humping, this kind of humbling, and the revocation of disturbance by very rough and disorderly words and conducts in the district at a governmental office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A statement prepared by the F;

1. A written statement of the main officer;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the photographs and CCTV images related to the case (damage to property and disturbance of the owner of a government office)

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act ( point of damage to property), Article 33(3)1 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act ( point of disturbance for revocation in official document), and selection of fines, respectively, 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. Determination as to the Defendant’s mental and physical disorder under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the criminal defendant’s mental and physical disorder at the time of committing the instant crime

Therefore, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, it seems that the defendant had no or weak ability to discern things at the time of the crime of this case. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant is rejected.