A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. 재물손괴미수 피고인은 2015. 5. 30. 18:55경 고양시 덕양구 D아파트 1△△4동 9△△호에 있는 피해자 E의 주거지 앞에서 피해자를 따라 들어오려다가 피해자로부터 제지를 받게 되자 피해자 주거지 현관문을 주먹과 발로 수회 치거나 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant tried to damage the property owned by the victim, but did not commit an attempted crime.

2. The Defendant: (a) stated the date and time in the preceding paragraph; and (b) at the place of the performance of official duties, stated that “a person who has been satisfies our house; (c)” was 12 reported and sent to the site, and stated that G was able to confirm the Defendant’s identity, and expressed that “a person who has been satisfyed out of his house and satisfyed out of his clothes, satisfy, she was flafed, she was flafed with her hand, and she was flafed with h’s sat, she was flafed with her head who has been sated.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers for handling 112 reported cases.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. Each statement of witness E, H and G in the second trial records;

1. A summary of video recording by the prosecution against the accused;

1. Statement of the police statement related H;

1. Notification of a department related to reporting 112 cases;

1. Application of investigative reports (verification as to whether a suspect A has a mental disability) statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 371 and 366 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. As to attempted damage to property, the defendant and his/her defense counsel shall recognize the present door of the victim's residence as brain wave, and make a simple experiment by recognizing that the defendant has broken down such brain wave.