A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

Around 00:50 on December 7, 2012, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol in the Defendant’s residence, Dogra 1st 302, the Defendant attempted to destroy a structure used as a residence by D and neighboring residents by attaching a disposable gate, clothes, plastic pets, etc. in possession of the Defendant’s wife from home to escape outside of the house. However, the Defendant attempted to destroy a structure used as a residence by Dog and neighboring residents with a disposable gate, which was in possession of the Defendant’s wife and Dogdog 1st 302.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

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 choice of punishment;

1. Articles 25 (2) and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act, which are statutory mitigation;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration shall be made again for the reason of sentencing);

1. The main sentence of Article 62-2 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Act on Probation;

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act

1. The summary of the argument is that the Defendant sponsed from the head office operated by the wife D, and sponsed into the body and sponsed into the spons, and did not assault D in the house as indicated in the judgment, and due to such assault, D does not have any fact of escape from the house.

2. The following circumstances found by the evidence admitted as evidence of guilt, namely, ① the police station at around December 6, 2012, the Defendant 22:22:20, while under the influence of alcohol, sent the Defendant’s door to the house and sent the door back to the house, and returned back the house after shut down the door, and the Defendant kidds the Defendant’s house by assaulting him.