A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four 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

1. On October 21, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 08:00 on October 21, 2016, the Defendant: (b) was under the influence of alcohol in the Prior India, operated by the victim D, who was parked in Daejeon Dong-gu Daejeon, left the wing 125 Otoba, which was owned by the victim, for repair; (c) while the Defendant continued to use the Oba, the Defendant was able to move up the 1,068,00 won to the 1,068,000 won of the repair cost of the Oba, the victim, who was parked on the 100 Oba, which was owned by the victim and parked on the 1,70,000 Oba, which was owned by the victim, to the extent that the repair cost of the 1,00 Obaba in excess of the upper part, was destroyed to the extent equivalent to 370,000 won.

2. The Defendant damaged public goods at around October 21, 2016, who was arrested as a flagrant offender due to the crime described in the foregoing paragraph 1. Around October 21, 2016, and was waiting along with the Daejeon Dong Police Station G District located in the Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon, Daejeon, and caused damage to the Defendant, on the multiple occasions, to walk at the right amounting to KRW 40,000 at the market price established in the said Dong-gu.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the use of goods by public offices, thereby harming their utility.

3. On November 20, 2016, the Defendant obstructed the performance of official duties, at around 01:45, and was 1394-1, in front of the apartment house, and was punished for a dispute with H in front of the apartment site, and the circumstances leading up to the Daejeon East Police Station I box of the Daejeon East Police Station called the Defendant after receiving a report that “the Defendant is taking advantage of his female,” and assaulted, by hand, the Defendant’s flaps of the said J’s flaps.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the prevention, suppression and investigation of police officers' crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police to J;

1. Each statement of K and D;

1. On-site photographs and damaged G global belt photographs;

1. Written estimate and written estimate for damage;

1. Application of on-site photographs and statutes governing damaged photographs;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Article 366 of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;