The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

On May 6, 2017, the Defendant: (a) reported the dispute between C and the victim D, a friendly fluor in the vegetable garden in Daegu North-gu building B, Daegu-gu, and (b) destroyed the property owned by the Defendant by the victim by taking several steps to give up three parts of the victim’s market value of the said dry field equivalent to KRW 3,000, the victim’s fluor, three parts of the fluoral species, three parts of the fluoral fluoral species, and three parts of the native species, and thereby impairing the utility of the crops.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol or statement concerning suspect examination of the police against D;

1. Part of a protocol concerning the examination of suspect C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs and investigative reports (the confirmation of such images) by shotfs and closures;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. A fine not exceeding 300,000 won to be suspended;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 59(1) of the Suspension of Pronouncement of Sentence (Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 59(1) reflects the Defendant’s mistake while making a confession of the instant crime; there is no history of criminal punishment; the amount of damage in this case is a significant small amount; the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime by assaulting the Defendant’s female life at the time; the Defendant also was partly assaulted by the victimized person but did not want to be punished; the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, and circumstances leading to the instant crime)