The defendant is a person who resides in the family of the victim C, D, and E, and the victim E is the father of the above C and D.

1. The Defendant, on November 14, 2015, was at the entrance of the Victim C (38 Does) located in the Gyeongcheon-si F on March 14, 2015, at around 09:00, was under the influence of alcohol, who was a dangerous object of the Victim C (38 Does) with the “GB” and sound, and was subject to the restraint of the disturbance from the person who was damaged by the disturbance, “I am under the influence of alcohol, I am under the influence of alcohol, I am under the influence of alcohol, and I am under the influence of five times;

C. It is only dead.

“At the time of the blue of the victim’s left part of the victim’s blue blue with the desire to the effect that it is “.”

As a result, the defendant carried dangerous objects and carried about about 14-day treatment for the victim.

2. Damage to property;

A. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in the above Paragraph 1, was destroyed to the extent that the repair cost is KRW 150,000,000, by unloading a shock network installed in the victim C’s entrance.

B. On November 18, 2015, around 14:55, the Defendant added “H” to the place indicated in the foregoing paragraph 1, where the victim D was unaware of, and where “I am to, the house unless I am.”

“The victim’s house gate was damaged to the effect that the victim’s house gate was KRW 620,000,000.

3. Intrusion upon residence;

A. On November 28, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 06:30 on November 28, 2015, at the place indicated in the foregoing paragraph (1); (b) under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant opened a door to the gate in which he was fright and closed to the victim’s residence, such as d., “In-house,” voiced with “in-house,” and infringed upon the victim’s residence.

B. On November 28, 2015, at around 08:00, the Defendant continued to intruded the victim’s residence, such as: (a) entering the front of the entrance in the manner described in the foregoing paragraph 1 in the manner described in the foregoing paragraph 3-A; (b) “Influence smartphones and watches; d., d., mutatis mutandis in the calculation of tax base, etc.”; and (c) taking advantage of the same manner as indicated in the foregoing paragraph 3-A, and

(c)

On November 28, 2015, the Defendant continued to do so.