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

At around 10:30 on January 23, 2015, the Defendant, within the city bus (C) No. 701, on the ground that the Defendant was running the road No. 29-gil-ro, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Chungcheongnam-gu, Daejeon, 10:30, 701, and she used the victim’s head back at one time with the victim’s back side at his/her left part, on the ground that the victim D was able to repair the Defendant. The Defendant used the victim’s head back at one time with the victim’s left part.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Ethical letters;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of criminal implements;

1. Article 261 and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act takes into account the fact that the degree of damage is relatively minor and the primary offender);

1. The Defendant’s defense counsel regarding the assertion of defense counsel under Article 48(1) of the Confiscation Criminal Act asserts that the Defendant committed the instant crime at the time of the instant crime, in a state of mental disorder, such as stimulative disorder, or mental disorder, caused by mental disorder at the time of the instant crime. However, according to the evidence revealed in the record, it is not deemed that the Defendant lost or lacks the ability to discern things at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, the above argument is not accepted.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.