Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 100,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Criminal facts

The defendant and the victim C are neighbors.

On December 25, 2015, around 14:00, the Defendant arbitrarily cut off shot tree (25 years mountain) from the market price of the victim owned by the victim, which was 25 meters high at the joint fence of the victim's house Do, and caused the utility of property by cutting it to electric saws.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Partial statement of the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (the complete certificate and quotation of the matters to be registered by the complainant), (the satellite photographs and submission of field photographs of the suspect), (the submission of suspect ground plans and reference documents), (Submission of copies of cadastral surveying results and paper drawings), and (Submission of Materials A by the defendant) shall apply;

1. Article 36 of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reasoning for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the defendant believed that there was a consent from the victims and village residents to be cut, and that there was no intention to destroy and damage property as a result of the crime, and that there was no intention to do so. However, according to the evidence of the judgment including the defendant's police statement to the effect that "the denial of the defendant was refused by the victim when he requested that the victim remove the shot tree to be removed to the boundary line for the purpose of rebuilding on the road, and even if the community residents were to grow up with the shot tree, the crime in the judgment is found guilty."

However, there are some points that may be considered in the circumstances in relation to the crime of this case in relation to the Village Re-Packing Corporation, and the defendant thought that the defendant's act has committed a crime against the victim and divided it into the victim, and the defendant and the victim have closed the argument of this case.