A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 19, 2013, at around 10:40 on December 19, 2013, the Defendant obstructed the flow of the entire vehicle by rapidly cutting off the 54 electric trains of Incheon Triju, which enter the line, from the 85-dong, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, by walking the steel waste source located there to a railway train, waiting for the electric trains from the 1st home platform of Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, to a railroad train, and by falling off the railroad tracks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police with respect to C and D;

1. Photographs of the scene of the crime, screen pictures, CDs of the crime, pictures of the place where the crime was committed, and motion pictures of the victim;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (for example, video CD cases), investigation report (for example, occurrence of criminal conduct and arrest place), investigation report (for photographs of a stop line), investigation report (for photographs of a stop line), etc.;

1. Article 186 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as "the grounds for the suspended sentence") includes: (a) the Defendant interfered with the operation of the entire vehicle causing inconvenience to many passengers using the vehicle; and (b) the Defendant’s above crime may lead to a large-scale accident in light of the characteristics of the entire vehicle traffic; (c) however, the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a sudden and contingent manner when the operation of the vehicle could be delayed due to the railway wave; (d) the Defendant was deemed to have committed the instant crime; (b) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and against his mistake, as well as the Defendant did not have the same criminal power; and (c) taking into account other favorable circumstances, age, character, character, family relationship, occupation, etc. of the Defendant after the instant crime; and (d) comprehensively taking into account all the factors of sentencing as shown in the arguments in the instant case, including the circumstances following the crime, Defendant’s age, character, family