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

At around 16:10 on October 8, 2012, the Defendant destroyed the victim C (n, 67 years of age) in Gosung-gun, Gosung-gun, Gosung-gun, the Defendant took a bath to the Defendant’s parents by telephone, and she saw the fire from the fire that he was prepared in advance to the Defendant’s parents, and caused the damage to the Defendant, such as cutting down the fire, cutting down two chemical parts and the glass continuously by hand.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous articles and damaged the property of the total amount of KRW 1,570,00.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. On-site photographs and on-site photographs;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the victim’s discretionary mitigation (Article 55(1)3 of the victim’s discretionary mitigation is a contingent crime that causes defects in the defendant’s desire to commit the instant crime, even if the defendant led to the confession and reflect of his/her own crime, and the victim’s son’s son borrowed money in the name of the defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Discretionary Reasons for Discretionary mitigation)