However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On June 25, 2020, around 19:20, the Defendant: (a) removed the victim C-owned glass of the victim C-owned D-wing and damaged the repair cost amounting to KRW 145,000, by removing the glass of the victim C-owned and the stringr of the C-owned vehicle, which was parked in the vicinity of the YY-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

2. 피고인은 2020. 7. 3. 14:30 경 전 항 기재 장소에서 그곳에 주차되어 있던 위 피해자 소유 D 봉고 자동차의 사이드 미러를 꺽어 시가 145,000원 상당의 수리비가 들도록 손괴하였다.

3. On July 3, 2020, from around 19:30 on July 3, 2020 to around 08:30 on July 4, 2020, the Defendant was parked at a place in the E market in the South, North, Heung-gun E market.

4. Around July 19, 2020, the Defendant: (a) removed one of the front license plate of a vehicle equivalent to KRW 27,000 in the market value from a 15,000 in order to shoulder the source of the automobile owned by the victim as set forth in paragraph (1); and (b) concealed the repair cost of KRW 73,00 in the place as set forth in paragraph (1) at the location as set forth in paragraph (1) at around 20:10 on July 19, 2020.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to C by each victim;

1. On-site photographs, photographs of the scene of damage to property, photographs of damaged vehicles, and photographs related to damage to property;

1. Application of written estimates for damage;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds that the crime is not good in that the defendant has repeatedly damaged the property owned by the victim, but the execution of a sentence shall be suspended in consideration of the fact that the defendant has mistakenly recognized and reflected the defendant, and that there is no record of the same crime

1. Protective observation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;