A man in his 50s who was summarily indicted on charges of damaging a colleague's car... acquitted after requesting a formal trial

Changwon District Court Masan Branch Chief Judge Jeon A-ram said, “There is no direct evidence from the scene of the damage, and the motive for the crime has not been proven.”

There was a case in which a defendant in his 50s who received a summary order of fines for damaging a co-worker's car requested a formal trial and was acquitted.

Chief Judge Jeon A-ram, Criminal Division 1, Masan Branch, Changwon District Court, sentenced Mr. A, in his 50s, who was indicted on charges of property damage, not guilty on October 25.

In October 2021, Mr. A was indicted on charges of scratching his colleague B's vehicle, which was parked on the road in front of the company where he worked, with a sharp tool similar to that of a Buddhist statue, incurring repair costs worth 3 million won.

The prosecution claimed guilt based on CCTV footage showing Mr. A leaving the front door of the company on the day of the incident, entering the passenger seat of the victim's vehicle, and then returning.

Mr. A completely denied the charges. At the time, he was returning to his car after submitting his resignation letter to the company, and he felt like someone was calling him from the company side of the wall, so he went inside for a moment to check.

At the same time, Mr. A emphasized, “I usually walk to work and do not know the employees’ vehicles, and on the day of the incident, I did not even know that the vehicle belonged to Mr. B.”

Chief Judge Jeon A-ram of the Masan branch of the Changwon District Court, who heard this case, said, “Even if you look at the enlarged CCTV footage, you can only see the scene where the defendant went close to the wall through the passenger side of the damaged vehicle and then returned,” and ruled in favor of Mr. A on the grounds that there was no direct evidence of damage to the vehicle.

Chief Judge Jeon A-ram also judged that there was insufficient evidence to reveal Mr. A's motive for the crime.

During the trial, Mr. B claimed that he had several conflicts with Mr. A over work issues and that he had also heard threatening words from Mr. A, but Chief Judge Jeon A-ram ruled that “Mr. B failed to clearly state the circumstances in which he heard the threatening words, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant knew about the victim’s vehicle.”

Attorney Choi Yong-hwan of Daeryun Law Firm (Lihan), who represented Mr. A, said, “A summary order of a fine was initially issued to Mr. A, but he actively claimed his innocence by requesting a formal trial.”

Attorney Choi Yong-hwan continued, “In order to be punished for property damage, ‘intention’ must be clearly proven,” and explained, “In this case, there was not only direct evidence of vehicle damage, but also no clear motive for the crime, and the court appears to have taken this into consideration as well.”

[View full article] - A man in his 50s who was summarily indicted on charges of damaging a colleague's car... acquitted after requesting a formal trial(Shortcut)