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

[2015 Highest 567]

1. On August 18, 2015, the Defendant: (a) opened the entrance door of the pertinent center in order to request the police officers of the relevant center to leave a taxi in front of the Seosan Police Station C Public Security Center located in Seosan-si, Seosan-si; (b) opened the entrance door of the said center in order to demand a taxi to leave the taxi; (c) opened a brick (20cm wide, 10cm long) on the ground that the locked was cut off, and cut off about 25 times the entrance door and the right door of the said center; and (d) laid down the door door and the door door of the said center in a protruding signboard located at the entrance of the said center, and damaged the said door door, window, signboard, etc. so that the repair cost of KRW 512,600, 512,600 is sufficient.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the use of goods by public offices, thereby harming their utility.

2. The Defendant discovered the victim D's D (the victim D) car parked in the above center parking lot at the time of the day, such as Paragraph 1, and 1, discovered a stone (34 cm in width, 23 cm in length, 6 cm in thickness) located at the above center without any reason, thereby damaging the property to the extent that the repair cost of KRW 1,221,086 is sufficient.

[2015 Highest 683]

3. On October 31, 2015, the Defendant destroyed the Defendant’s hiver vehicle owned by the Defendant’s hiverized G owned by the Defendant, which was parked on the grounds that her mother was not on the front road in front of the F in Seosan City, on the grounds that her mother was not on the Defendant’s own, by cutting off the Defendant’s hiver vehicle with cement bricks in the said place at the victim’s market price equivalent to KRW 1,034,526, supra, on three occasions.

[2015 Highest 690]

4. On October 21, 2015, the Defendant found in the victim G located in Seosan City F on the ground that the Defendant’s mother was not a telephone conversation with the Defendant, and his mother was refused to live together with the Defendant at the victim G located in the ward. On the ground that the Defendant’s mother was denied to live together with the Defendant, the Defendant saw the television amounting to KRW 50,000 at the market price of the victim G located in the ward, which was the victim’s G located in the ward, into the floor. The Defendant saw the television amounting to KRW 30,000 at the market price and smartphones owned by the victim’s J.