Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 16, 2018, the Defendant damaged the victim C’s property damage by drinking the victim’s 7 flus smartphone in a flus smartphone, which was placed on the outside customer’s side of the E convenience store located in Daejeon Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, without any particular reason, at a price equivalent to KRW 1,200,00 of the market value of the victim’s possession, which was placed on the outside customer’s side of the convenience store.

2. The Defendant who damaged property against the Victim F was under the influence of alcohol at the time and time set forth in paragraph 1, and at a place set forth in paragraph 1, thereby damaging the victim’s market value in an amount of KRW 1,00,000, which is the victim’s possession on the outdoor consignee, and without any particular reason, destroyed the victim’s 6S smartphone by throwing one unit on the floor.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement of C, F, and G preparation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on internal investigation reports, scenes, and photographs damaged thereby;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act include the defendant’s age, occupation, sex, environment, motive and means of crime, results, etc., and the various conditions of sentencing as stated in the argument of this case, and the sentence shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the following circumstances.

In light of the circumstances, contents, etc. of each of the instant crimes, the crime liability is not easy, the fact that there was a history of punishment several times for violent crimes, the fact that each of the instant crimes was committed without being aware of during the period of suspension of execution, the fact that all of the instant crimes were led to the confession of all of the instant crimes, the fact that there was no record of criminal punishment more than a suspended execution, the fact that there was no record of criminal punishment more than a suspended execution, the fact that the instant crimes were caused by contingently under the influence of a somewhat drunk alcohol, and the fact that efforts are made to prevent recurrence of crimes, such as receiving medical treatment for alcoholic content after this case