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

1. On January 2, 2013, the Defendant: (a) returned his identification card and seal lent by the victim C (year 45) in front of the Gangseo-gun, Gangwon-gu; (b) on the ground that there is no apology, on the ground that he did not go against; (c) on the part of the victim boarding the taxi, fatd the victim’s face one to two occasions; and (d) fatd the victim’s fat; and (e) fatd the victim’s face one time by drinking fat; and (e) fatd the victim’s fat, the victim fatd the fat in the taxi and drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant committed assault against the victim.

2. A violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively, deadly weapons, etc.) (collectively, destruction and damage, etc.) committed by the Defendant, as mentioned in paragraph (1) above, C saw the escape of the Defendant, thereby having improved that is a dangerous object attributable to the Defendant’s front wall, and C gets on the E-si operated by D in order to avoid the Defendant, and thereby, C gets on his cab with a improved light used by the victim F-si and 302,398 won for repairing the light light, etc. owned by the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the property owned by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Each investigation report (general) - Attachment of photographs taken on the part of the damage to a taxi, verification of the other party to the crime against the suspect A, and application of the Acts and subordinate statutes attached to estimates for damage to a taxi;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act that applies to the crime, Article 260 (1) of the choice of the punishment, Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 366 of the Criminal Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37 and Article 38 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act provides that the Defendant deposited KRW 200,00 for D as the above E-si repair cost, the Defendant reflects his mistake, and the instant crime appears to have occurred by contingency.