A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that 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

On December 15:20, 2018, the Defendant: (a) on December 15:20, 2018, at the C store located in Daegu Seo-gu, Daegu-gu, upon receiving a report from his employees, sent to the employees, and was on board a slope E belonging to the Daegu Han Police Station D District Unit, and a patrol police officer G strawet E, and returned to the Republic of Korea.

At around 16:05 on the same day, the Defendant was required to return home from the above E and F in front of the Defendant’s residence in the Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, and then damaged the patrol vehicle expectation or loss to move while taking a bath, and walking the string door of the patrol vehicle by walking the string door of the patrol vehicle, and as his hand, she turn on the string of the above E and F, and was in the police uniform.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with legitimate performance of duties concerning E and F's crime prevention and suppression of police uniforms, and caused the use of the above patrol vehicle, which is a public object, to be equivalent to KRW 268,718.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A report on investigation (on-site situations) and a report on investigation (to make a statement by telephone of the persons with the shootings);

1. Written estimate of repair costs;

1. The application of photographs and photographs to patrols;

1. Article 141 (1) of the Criminal Act ( point of damage to public goods) and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the crime of this case is not good, and the defendant has a record of having been punished several times as violent crimes.

However, all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's confession, mistake, reimbursement of vehicle repair cost, and the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, means and result of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc.