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

"2016 Highest 4920"

1. On October 10, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 10:00, the Geumcheon-gu Seoul Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul Metropolitan Government Geumcheon-dong); (b) was on the part of the Defendant, despite having no intent or ability to pay the taxi fee, and was on the part of the Defendant, as if he were to pay the taxi fee, he/she was on the part of the Victim B, and then was on the part of the Defendant, who had the Victim drive the said taxi to the front of the Seoul Geumcheon-gu Police Station, thereby obtaining pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 6,300.

2. On October 10, 2016, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties at the Seoul Geumcheon Police Station located in 1453, Nam-gu, Seoul, Seoul, Namcheon-gu, Seoul, Seoul, the Southern-gu, Seoul, Seoul, where the Defendant rancing the Defendant due to B and sib problems, took one time the left side of E belonging to the Seoul Geumcheon Police Station D.

As a result, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties concerning the E police station security service.

On October 16, 2016, the Defendant: (a) cut off the market value of the pedestrian aids owned by the victim H (V, 78 years old) and owned by the victim at the entrance at the G Center located in F on October 16, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

"2016 Highest 4920"

1. Statement made by the police for B and E;

1. A written statement of I and J;

1. The 2017 Highest 72"si Receipt;

1. A H statement;

1. Seizure records;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (CCTV image verification);

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 347(1), 136(1), and 329 of the Criminal Act (Selection of Imprisonment with prison labor) concerning facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence is the enemy who committed each of the crimes at the same time, it is not good that the defendant committed each of the crimes.

However, the degree of damage is not severe, partial damage is recovered, the defendant's age, sexual conduct, circumstances after the crime, family relationship, etc. are considered comprehensively.