Defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one million won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one million won shall be the one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the spouse of the victim B (here, 34 years of age) who was living separately from December 2018 and is in a divorce lawsuit.

Around 03:00 on January 1, 2019, the Defendant, while drunkly and under the influence of alcohol at the victim’s residence in Jeju-si, destroyed the front door of a 700,000 won at the market price owned by the victim of the next domicile by walking the door door to the effect that “the victim and the victim do not do so.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made by the defendant in this court;

1. Statement of the suspect interrogation protocol on the accused prepared by the police;

1. Statement of statement concerning B prepared by the police;

1. Entry in the petition form B;

1. Each description of an investigation report prepared by the prosecution (to hear statements from the party who has filed a complaint) and an investigation report (to hear statements from the victim);

1. Entry of each 112 Reporting Case Handling List in police preparation; and

1. Entry of a family relation certificate and a certified copy of resident registration card;

1. Application of each of the related visual 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 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. 【The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 【The scope of a sentence imposed in accordance with the first summary order 【The scope of a sentence imposed in accordance with the Act 50,000 won to seven million won】 Inasmuch as the Defendant alleged that a fine of KRW 1 million is too excessive, the Defendant is not aware of the motive for the instant crime, the accurate amount of damage incurred by the instant crime, the Defendant’s endeavor to prevent damage to the victim after the instant crime, and the Defendant appears to have made efforts to prevent damage to the victim, and there is no criminal record after 2015, the amount of fine imposed in the first summary order should be determined again against the Defendant.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.