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

1. On June 21, 2017, the Defendant infringed upon the victim’s residence at the house of the victim C (n, 23 years old), which was a chain located in Sungnam-si A, Sungnam-si, and around 02:40 on June 21, 2017, on the ground that the victim did not have contact, and went into the second floor of the victim’s house through stairs, and went into the entrance of the second floor where the victim’s house is located.

2. The Defendant damaged property by cutting off CCTV cables equivalent to KRW 200,000,00 in the market price given out of the victim KT telele, even though the Defendant attempted to cut off knife in a knife with a knife with a knife in order to prevent the game at the time, time, at the place specified in the above paragraph 1.1.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to C or D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (to attach CCTVs for victims and damaged photographs);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of intrusion upon residence), Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor, respectively;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes: former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act (an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes against grave intrusion);

1. The scope of the recommendation of the sentencing guidelines as to the crime of destroying the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the conditions favorable to the reasons for sentencing as set forth below) falls under the category 1 (property damage, etc.) mitigated area (one month or June). However, since the sentencing guidelines are concurrent with the crime of intrusion upon a house for which no sentencing guidelines have been set, the minimum limit of the sentence range is considered only when the defendant violated the victim's residence, even though he had the power to have been punished by a fine due to intrusion upon the victim's residence, and thereby seriously undermines the peace of residence such as destroying the victim's residence and destroying the property, the crime is not absolutely weak.

However, there is no criminal history that the defendant has been punished in excess of a fine, and the damage of property is caused by the damage.