However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On May 6, 2016, the Defendant, around 01:05, raised a dispute over the issue of taxi drivers and charges from 40,000, Seo-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Yancheon-gu, Yancheon-gu, Seo-gu, 1,000, in front of 40, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, 1,000.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Reporting on the arrest of a case;

1. Photographs of the damaged vehicle;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation;

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment and punishment for the crime;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for an order to attend a lecture [decision of type]: Class 1 (Special Standard of Destruction, etc.) [person subject to sentencing] - Where actual damage is minor, where punishment is not imposed (including serious efforts to recover damage), or substantial damage has been restored (decision of the sphere of recommendation]: Special mitigation area [Scope of recommended punishment]: From January to June / [Scope of punishment] applicable: Article 366 of the Criminal Act; Article 366 of the Criminal Act; Article 366 of the statutory punishment: One month to three years [decision of sentence]: the defendant has been punished for several violent crimes. It is disadvantageous to the defendant.

The extent of damage is minor and contradictory, and the most favorable circumstance is that the victim and the victim have agreed smoothly.

This situation and the lower limit of the above sentencing criteria were equally considered and the punishment was determined.