A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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.

Punishment of the crime

On April 13, 2016, the Defendant, who was going to the 20th election district for the National Assembly member C, was dissatisfied with the music and the broadcast of the candidate candidate support appeal in the vicinity of the E in which the Defendant was living every three days before around the 3th election day.

On April 9, 2016, the Defendant attempted to sleep in the above E E accommodation, but was obstructed due to the sound of broadcasting emitted from the D candidate election campaigned vehicle, but on the same day, around 19:57, the Defendant moved to the D candidate candidate election campaigned vehicle of 1 ton of 1st ton of the victim H(54 years old) who was parked on the road in front of the 19:57 G station at the 19:57 square.

The Defendant continued to walk the I 1 ton cargo vehicle, which is an advertising facility reported to the J Election Management Committee with a speech place and an interview, from the D candidate’s side, to walk the I 1 ton cargo vehicle, and then cut the spons by hand, and then destroyed the spons by hand. After the above subsidization, the Defendant spicked two times on an election propaganda banner installed after the splate driver’s seat in possession of the above spons before the sponsing, but the above banner was not attached to the D plplos as a material, and the two points of the above banner are about 7 cm, about 5 cm, and about 5 cm.

Accordingly, the defendant did not commit an attempted crime but did not commit an attempted crime while intending to damage the above vehicle, which is a propaganda facility legally reported under the Public Official Election Act, and at the same time setting fire to the above vehicle.

The prosecutor prosecuted the facts charged in the instant case as substantive concurrent crimes with the crime of violating the Public Official Election Act and the crime of preventing ordinary automobiles. However, the Defendant committed an act in the course of doing an act, such as placing the vehicle with hand in order to damage promotional vehicles, and thus, the above two crimes are in an ordinary concurrent relationship.

I would like to say.

Summary of Evidence

1...