A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the grandchild of the victim C in Daegu-gu building 1010, and is living together with the victim.

At around 02:40 on September 27, 2015, the Defendant: (a) on the front corridor No. 1010 of the above D building No. 101; (b) on the day before the end, the injured party pointed out the Defendant’s living attitude; (c) went to the house after having talked with the injured party; (d) but the injured party did not open the door; (c) in the house in which the injured party resides, brought the place of living in the apartment corridor, brought the place of living information in the apartment corridor, brought the place of living information in the apartment corridor, and added the place of living information that was fluened into the front of the front door; and (d) collected the plastic stop box in front of the front door, but the injured party did not go through the wind of the water that was stored in the main electronic system and attempted to do so.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. A report on the results of field identification and a explanatory note (written request for an on-site fingerprint appraisal and a reply thereto);

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 174 and 164 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

1. Mitigation of attempted punishment: Articles 25(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing shall be considered in consideration of the conditions favorable to the attention) of the mitigated amount;

1. Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution does not apply to offenses for which the sentencing guidelines are not applicable to offenses for which the reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing has been repeated in favorable circumstances). The crime of this case is committed by the Defendant, which committed an attempted attempt by the Defendant, to distort with the victim’s residence where the Defendant resides together with the victim. Considering that there were many households in the building in question, which may cause serious harm to human life and property, the Defendant’s liability

However, there is no loss of human life due to early extinguishment of a fire, property damage is low, the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, and the defendant is guilty.