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 August 14, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 20:40 on August 14, 2017; (b) around 20:40, in EE operated by the victim D D in Northern-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Northern-si; (c) without any justifiable reason, the Defendant saw and sits on the tables; (d) without permission; and (e) on the part of the victim against whom the Defendant was prevented, the Defendant scook shall be discarded to the following:

The victim interfered with the victim's coffee collection business by threat of 30 minutes, such as threatening him/her, sitting on the test, bringing him/her a bath to customers and his/her players.

2. On August 14, 2017, the Defendant damaged goods for public use at the office of the office of the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-ro, 705 “Sacheon-gu, Seocheon-gu Police Station-type, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Police Station-type” (hereinafter “Sacheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, North Korea Police Station-type”), which was reported for the foregoing reason and was arrested and taken custody of a flagrant offender, and damaged goods used by public offices by writing one computer monitor at his/her hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. D's self-written statements;

1. On-site photographs;

1. A report on investigation;

1. A report on investigation (Attachment of a photograph of damaged public goods), and a photograph of damaged public goods;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (at the time of damage to public goods);

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of damage to goods for public use) and the choice of imprisonment, respectively, with prison labor;

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 suspended execution;

1. Unfavorable circumstances of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act: Defendant’s business operation under the influence of alcohol is obstructed, damage to public goods within the police station, etc. In light of the method of crime; circumstances that are favorable to the Defendant’s failure to compensate for damage: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is against the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime; and (b) circumstances after the crime are committed.