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.

On May 26, 2016, the Defendant, at around 02:00, 20: (a) 2 of the “D main shop” in the “D main shop” 2 of the “D main shop” operated by the Defendant: (b) sent alcohol to the victim and asked the victim to provide a singing time service; (c) the victim was refused to do so on the ground that the business was completed by the injured party; (d) once the left-hand head part of the victim’s head was licker; and (e) the victim’s face was lived with a cell phone with the defect in photographing the video taken one time; and (e) the victim’s face and body were hicked by hand, and (e) the victim was injured by two lives and cerebrs for treatment for about 14 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspect C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of amount of punishment (the punishment shall be imposed in consideration of the fact that there is no particular criminal record other than twice the punishment, the fact that there is a reflective nature, the fact that there is an agreement with the victim, etc.);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution ( normal consideration as seen earlier);