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

1. On August 2, 2008, the injured Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim’s 3-dong 401 residential area, Echeon-si, Embacheon-si, on the part of his 3-dong 3-dong 401, that he would not make a telephone call at night to the injured’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s left-hand part

2. On September 20, 2012, the Defendant violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group., deadly weapons, etc.) around 19:30 on September 20, 2012, the Defendant suffered an injury to the victim by taking about about 3 weeks of treatment by taking about the following: (a) the kitchen knife (20 cm length, approximately 30 cm in total length), which is a dangerous article for the victim, and the kitchen knife ( approximately 20 cm in the knife length, about 30 cm in the knife) and knife in the knife of plastic beer disease ( approximately 40 cm in length) which is a dangerous article.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. A complaint;

1. Family relation certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each written diagnosis;

1. Relevant Articles 257 (1) (the point of injury and the choice of imprisonment), and Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 3 (the point of injury while carrying a deadly weapon) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (to the extent that the long-term punishment for two crimes is aggregated);

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Considerations, etc. agreed with the victim);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The degree of injury, relationship with the victim, etc. is not good in view of the crime committed by unilaterally inflicting an injury and carrying dangerous articles on the ground that the opinion between the victim and his/her wife does not coincide with the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act.

provided, however, that the victim is a victim.