Who Tore the 12,000-Won Vinyl Cover Over a License Plate? [True Story]

[Financial News] The front of a Kia Carnival parked in a lot was covered with a vinyl sheet, cardboard, and a plastic panel. A 69-year-old man, identified as A, who had long been in conflict over parking issues, stood in front of it. His purpose was to photograph the vehicle's license plate.
In October 2024, A lifted the vinyl cover that was shielding the front of B's Kia Carnival in a parking lot in front of a building in Yongsan District, Seoul. He then took a photo of the license plate.
The problem came afterward. A few days later, the victim submitted a photo of the torn vinyl cover to the police. The Prosecution Service said A had torn the vinyl cover, worth about 12,800 won, in order to photograph the license plate, and indicted him on charges of property damage.
The first trial, however, reached a different conclusion. The court acknowledged that A had lifted and removed the vinyl cover and taken a photo of the license plate. It also accepted that the victim had submitted a photo of the torn cover to the police.
Still, the court said it was difficult to conclude that the vinyl cover had been torn because of A's actions. At the time, the front license plate area was protected by three layers: a vinyl cover, cardboard, and a plastic panel. The court also considered the fact that the victim continued to keep the vehicle covered with the same vinyl sheet for some time after the incident.
Based on the evidence submitted by the prosecution alone, the first trial found it insufficient to establish that the vinyl was torn when A lifted the cover, and acquitted him.
The Prosecution Service appealed. It argued that, based on the victim's statement, the cover could have been torn sometime between the night of the incident and the following morning, and that CCTV footage also showed A removing the cover. The prosecution also claimed that no third party other than A could have damaged the cover.
The appellate court, however, reached the same conclusion as the first trial.
According to legal sources on the 25th, the First Criminal Division of the Seoul Western District Court, presided over by Judge Ban Jung-woo, dismissed the prosecution's appeal on June 25 in the appellate trial of A, who had been indicted on property damage charges.
The appellate panel said that even after reviewing the evidence examined in the first trial together with testimony from a witness in the appeal, the original ruling remained justified. It found that the evidence was insufficient to conclude that the vinyl cover was torn when A lifted the vehicle cover, and that there was no other evidence to support such a finding.
The panel stated, "The original court's judgment is reasonable and persuasive," and added, "It cannot be said that there was any legal error that affected the verdict due to a mistaken finding of fact."
[email protected] Choi Seung-han Reporter