2019 Highest 4639 Damage to public goods

Arrest (tentative name), 99, male, and non-permanent

Residential Ulsan

Standard place of registration:

In the case of the heading office (prosecution) and Kim Young-young (public trial)

Attorney Kim Kim (Korean National University)

9, 2020

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of two months.

Facts of crime

【Criminal Records】

On October 19, 2018, the defendant was sentenced to a two-year suspension of execution of official duties by the Ulsan District Court on June 27, 2018, and the decision became final and conclusive on the 27th day of the same month, and was sentenced to imprisonment for three months on January 15, 2020, and the above decision became final and conclusive on March 31, 2020.

At around November 13, 2019:02:18, the Defendant was arrested as a fine on the part of the police box located in Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Ulsan-gun, Seoyang-gun, Seoyang-do, 77, and became aware that the Defendant’s pro-Japanese Jin-gu was informed of the fact that he was a fine on the back of the police box ******* the Defendant’s pro-Japanese-gu, who was on board the back of the Tysta, informed the police officer of the fact that he was a fine on the charge of the Defendant’s fine, then the Defendant 269,280 won of the repair cost by cutting the back the back glass of the front seat of the patrol while he was on a hand. Accordingly, the Defendant damaged the goods used by public offices, thereby impairing its utility.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of the defendant

1. Images of CDs;

1. Photographs damaged glass of the patrol car;

1. Specifications of automobile maintenance;

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Career inquiry about crimes, previous convictions and results of confirmation of dispositions, and application of each sentence of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions and selection of punishment on the facts of crime;

Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act, Selection of Imprisonment

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

Defendant for the reason of sentencing under the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act committed the instant crime once more than twice during the period of suspension of execution and probation, and again committed the instant crime while being tried for committing the crime of injury. Furthermore, even during the grace period for obstructing the performance of official duties, patrol police officers committed the instant crime. However, even though they were under the suspension period of execution due to interference with the performance of official duties, the number of patrol police officers committed the instant crime. In short, there was lack of mind for Defendant to respect public authority and make up for punishment. The Defendant’s age is the age of the Defendant, whose mother made efforts to compensate for repair patrol expenses, etc., and was punished together with the finalized injury (three months). The sentence shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) the sentence may have been imposed together with the final and conclusive injury (three months).

Judges Kim Yong-hee