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

1. On April 15, 2016, at around 23:56, the Defendant: (a) found drinking in the house of the said victim C, which was located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, B and B01, and opened a door, and opened the door; (b) however, the victim, who did not open the door, destroyed the front door glass of the market value of KRW 90,00,000, the market value of the victim’s ownership, which was owned by the victim, by drinking in the house of the victim; and (c) laid down the front door of the market value of KRW 180,00,00,000, which was on the part of the victim’s house.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the victim's property.

2. The Defendant, at the time, at the place specified in paragraph (1) at the time, and at the place specified in paragraph (1), destroyed the entrance glass door that the victim C does not open the door, carried the door door door door door door door door, cut off the lock door door door door door, opened the lock door door door door, entered the door door of the victim, and continued to find a man who is hidden by the victim, followed the storm door, small bump, bath room, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the victim's residence and searched the victim's residence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. Photographs on the occurrence site;

1. Receipts:

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on safe photographs damaged;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 321 of the Criminal Act, Article 321 of the Criminal Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. In light of the following: (a) the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act does not include the Defendant’s nature of each of the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant’s mistake is recognized; (c) the victim does not want the Defendant’s punishment by mutual consent with the victim; and (d) the Defendant does not have any criminal power against

Part of the dismissal of prosecution; and