A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On November 25, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 500,00 to a fine of KRW 500,00 for the crime of causing property damage by the District Court, and the same year on July 27, 2015.

8.5. & 8. The same year

8. 24. Each member of the District Court is a person who was indicted for property damage due to each of the acts of causing property damage, and since 2002, the victim C and the spores were spores around June 2015. The victim D is the mother of the victim C, and the victim E is the father of the victim C.

1. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual destruction and damage, etc.);

A. At around 18:10 on August 18, 2015, the Defendant: (a) damaged the victim D’s house located in Macheon-si F to the next floor of the entrance door owned by the victim; and (b) damaged the city’s aesthetic repair cost.

B. On August 21, 2015, around 03:30 on August 21, 2015, the Defendant destroyed the current glass owned by the said victim so that the market value may be destroyed by spreading the door door.

C. On August 22, 2015, at the same place around 04:30, the Defendant destroyed the repair cost equivalent to KRW 504,000 by shouldering two parts of the glass door owned by the said victim with a power. D.

At around 01:08 on 30, 2015, the Defendant damaged the 350,000 won of repair costs by exposing the entrance glass owned by the said victim at the same place.

Accordingly, the defendant habitually damaged another's property four times.

2. Fraud;

A. On July 29, 2015, around 00:30 on July 29, 2015, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim by acting as if he would pay a taxi fee to the H-business taxi operated by the victim G in front of the Songcheon-si, Songcheon-si, Songcheon-do, in the manner of leading the victim to pay the taxi fee, had the victim operate the said taxi through his own government and Yangju-si, etc., and had the victim operate the said taxi even on the street in front of the Macheon-si, Macheon-si, Macheon-si, Macheon-do.

However, even if the victim operates a taxi as above, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to pay the taxi fee.

After all, the defendant deceivings the victim as such and thereby is the victim.