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

At around 18:30 on December 10, 2016, the Defendant: (a) under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant: (b) destroyed the Plaintiff’s “D’s passbook” in Jeju operated by the Victim B; (c) then, (d) heard the Plaintiff’s statement that “the passbook was lost, lost, found the passbook from the damaged; and (d) took the Plaintiff’s own account of the fact that the passbook was not found from the damaged; and (e) continuously destroyed the electricity of the market value of KRW 50,00,00 in front of the route in front of the route in front of the route in front of the route in front; and (e) continuously destroyed the equipment, etc. in front of the route in front of the route in front of the route in front of the city in front of the route in front; (e) one chemical value of KRW 100,00,00 in front of the market value; and (e) 201,000,00 won in front of the route in front of the route in front.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (verification of CCTVs for damage);

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

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

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act recognize the Defendant as a crime, and agreed with the victim, while the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of one million won for the crime of damaging public property in 2011, a fine of one million won for the crime of destroying property in 2012, a fine of one million won for the crime of destroying property in 2012, and a fine of 1.5 million won for the crime of destroying property in 2015, and again committed the instant crime, the crime is very bad, and the Defendant committed the instant crime again. In particular, in this case, the Defendant was going to walk the electric riot during the singing room business, and thus, there is a risk in the form of the act.

In addition, the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of various sentencing conditions prescribed by Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, circumstances, and circumstances after the crime.