A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

[ within the period of parole on August 14, 2009, the Defendant was released on August 14, 2009, and the period of parole on September 28, 2010 expired after being sentenced to an order to attach an electronic tracking device for the above criminal facts at the same court on January 28, 2014. The Defendant is a person who was sentenced to an order to attach an electronic tracking device for five years from February 6, 2014 upon being sentenced to an electronic tracking device attachment order for the above criminal facts at the Daegu District Court.

[Criminal facts]

1. No person who has installed an electronic device in violation of his/her duty to maintain the utility of the electronic device shall arbitrarily separate the electronic device from his/her body during the period of attachment of the electronic device, destroy it, interfere with radio waves, alter data received, or otherwise impair its utility;

Nevertheless, from around 05:29 on July 16, 2015 to 06:29 on the same day, the Defendant was unable to identify the location of the Defendant as he left the Defendant’s residence in Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, without carrying a portable tracking device, and thereby was unable to confirm the location of the Defendant. In addition, from around 13:09 on June 21, 2015 to around 18:55 on January 9, 2018, the Defendant maintained the utility of the location tracking device over 22 times in total, as shown in the list of crimes.

2. A person who has violated the matters to be observed by an electronic device subject to the surveillance and has attached the electronic device in violation of the order to attach the electronic device shall not violate the re-compliance with the order after receiving warning under the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection without justifiable grounds;

On December 14, 2015, the defendant, on the ground that he/she refused to comply with the direction and supervision of the supervisor of the Daegu Protection Observation on the ground that he/she could be subject to disadvantageous disposition, such as arrest, detention, revision of protective disposition, etc., on the ground that he/she continued to violate the rules without justifiable grounds.

“A written warning was issued to the effect that it was “.”

A. On December 20, 2015, the Defendant left the scope of responding to the attachment from the protective observation officer around 10:10 on December 20, 2015, and thus, the Defendant’s person.