Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months, and 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 February 13, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years and a fine of 300,000 won for 8 months in the Gwangju District Court due to a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., and the judgment was finalized on February 21, 2013.

On August 14, 2014, at around 15:20, the Defendant: (a) stated that the Victim E (Inn, 49 years of age) who is the owner of the D cafeteria located in Gwangju Northern-gu, would not drink alcohol; (b) brought about the front glass window (200,000 won at the market price) on the ground that she would not drink alcohol.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged another person's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of suspect of the police accused;

1. E statements;

1. Photographss of damage and written agreement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, inquiry reports;

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Where the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence (the scope of recommending punishment) is the mitigated area (one to six months), the mitigated area (including special mitigation), the punishment is not suspended (including serious efforts to recover damage), or a significant damage is recovered (the decision of sentencing is made] the defendant recognizes the crime of this case, and the defendant is deeply divided.

The defendant committed this case during the period of suspension of execution due to the same crime, and the defendant needs to be punished by severe punishment due to a majority of the criminal records of fraud and obstruction of business.

However, in the light of the scale of damage of this case, the issue is not hot, and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant because the victim agreed smoothly with the victim.

In addition, it is decided as per Disposition by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances regarding sentencing.