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

At around 19:55 on September 13, 2013, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol within the “EM store” operated by the victim D (Inn, 49 years of age), breadles in plastic gambling, was broken the beer’s disease on the floor, and the beer’s disease was broken off by the door door door, putting the victim on the wall, putting the shoulderer’s shoulder, which is a dangerous object, and putting the victim into the wall, putting the wall, putting the said shoulderer’s disease on the wall, putting the victim into the back of the victim’s mouth, and posing the stormer’s disease on the wall.”

Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim by using dangerous things.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime concerned, and Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., reflectiveness, non-conformity with punishment, or no criminal record of suspended execution or heavier punishment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Discretionary Reasons for Discretionary mitigation);