Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On June 2, 2012, between 20:30 and 21:00 on the same day, the Defendant stated that the repair cost of this case, where the amount cannot be determined from 10,000 to 303, the repair cost of which is 330,000 won, is stated to the effect that the repair cost of this case is e.g., the repair cost of which is e., “30,000 won.” However, the victim D was damaged by this court and investigative agency (hereinafter “the Defendant’s act”). However, the police officer stated that the witness was accompanied by the above monitoring, and that the witness was gathered, and that the amount of 20,00,000 and the amount of 30,000,000,000,000 won were e.g., damage to the evidence records). In light of the fact that the above repair cost was stated in the estimate, the victim appears to be included in the above repair cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Application of investigation reports (general), on-site destruction photographs, and written estimates-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 366 of the Selection of Punishment;

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion on the claim of the defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order asserts that although the defendant supported by the victim's computer monitoring and lapt, it does not lead to the result of damage, it was caused by the victim's own computer monitoring on the floor.

In this Court, the victim confirmed that the above monitor’s screen value has been damaged before the date when the monitor was posted, and the Nohbuk is open.