However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[criminal records] On September 4, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of his/her duties for six months at the District Court of Jung-gu, which became final and conclusive on September 12, 2015.

[2] On May 15, 2015, the Defendant: (a) was under the influence of alcohol on the ground that the victim E was not paid the money at the “D funeral hall” parking lot located in Spocheon-si, Spocheon-si; (b) was set off stone, a dangerous object, and ice attached to the victim’s vehicle; and (c) destroyed the said vehicle by the victim, who was on the driver’s seat of the said vehicle, again laid off the front door of the son, thereby damaging the repair cost of approximately KRW 2 million.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and destroyed another's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of E in a written investigation of the suspect of the police against the defendant (two times, replacement of the suspect);

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. A damaged photograph;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on the result of confirmation of the previous convictions in disposition, and application of the text of judgment;

1. Article 369 (1) and Article 366 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Articles 369 (Selection of Imprisonment);

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. Circumstances that are disadvantageous to the effect that the sentencing guidelines are not applied as a crime before final and conclusive judgment on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on Suspension of Execution: The Defendant’s confessions and objects to the instant crime; the amount of damage is not significant; and the instant crime is in the relationship of concurrent crimes with the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties in the first head of the crime as indicated in the judgment; thus, the crime of this case is in the relationship between the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties in the judgment and the crime of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act; thus, the case of obstructing the performance of official duties in the judgment and the equity should be considered at the same time with the crime of obstructing the performance of official duties in the judgment finalized; and