except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. At around 16:00 on January 30, 2020, the Defendant: (a) discovered that the competent official D (Nam, 50 years of age) and the competent official E (Nam, 63 years of age) who is a public official of the Seoul Northern District Office C, who is a public official of the Seoul Northern District Office C, controlled the Defendant’s vehicle that was illegally parked in the above place; (b) asked the public official to cancel the control; (c) was rejected; and (d) caused the Defendant to be dismissed; (d) taken the face of the said D one time in drinking, and (e) went beyond the consideration of the said D’s bridge.

Then, the defendant entered a nearby F cafeteria and used a hacker inserted (1m in length), which is a dangerous object located in that place, and used the public official as a hacker and used the hacker to the public official.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of the above public officials on parking control.

2. As the Defendant was found to have taken the Defendant’s form of crime on a gallon 5 mobile phone, which was used by the said public official D while assaulting the said public official at the time and place indicated in paragraph (1), as stated in paragraph (1), the Defendant got off the said mobile phone and galloned the amount of the said mobile phone, which is equivalent to one million won at the market price, by cutting off the said mobile phone and cutting off the cell phone on the floor.

Accordingly, the Defendant damaged the goods used by public offices.

3. When the Defendant, at the time and place indicated in paragraph (1), discovered that the above public official D, who is the victim, continued to photograph the Defendant’s crime by Y3 mobile phones owned by him, the Defendant got off the aforementioned mobile phone and broken down the liquid situation of the above mobile phone at a cost equivalent to KRW 580,000,000 in the market value.

Accordingly, the above defendant damaged the property of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. The official mobile phone photographs, D's mobile phone photographs, official disease photographs, and black stuffs image data to capture.