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

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On May 14, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor by the Seoul Northern District Court for obstructing the performance of official duties, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 24, 2015.

【Criminal facts” on September 19, 2015, around 21:55, on the ground that TV was set aside in the Defendant’s residence, Nowon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, 108 Dong 1212, and 1212, it was difficult for the Defendant to put the Defendant into one-time newspaper on the floor of the above apartment elevator and put him into a single-use newspaper.

Accordingly, the defendant destroyed the object owned by him and caused public danger.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of Chapter 1 of the CCTV, on-site photographs, criminal tools and field photographs, investigation reports (CCTV reading), photographs from CCTV videos, and CCTV screen pictures installed in the crime scene (B apartment 108 elevator 108 elevator);

1. Relevant Article 167 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act and Articles 167 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness due to the network mental fissionation, at the time of judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of the protection observation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

Therefore, according to the records, the defendant's mental disorder 3 level and received hospitalized treatment at the D hospital due to the network mental disorder is acknowledged, but considering the defendant's speech and behavior at the time of the crime and immediately after the crime, it cannot be seen that the defendant did not have the ability or decision-making ability to discern things due to the above disease. Thus, the above argument is rejected.

The defendant with reason for sentencing is already sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of suspended execution, and the crime of this case is pending in the appellate court.