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

On September 25, 2019, at around 03:45, the Defendant: (a) sought a request for presentation of identification cards from the victim C (son, 42 years of age) who had been employed in front of the hotel b hotel in Gui-si, B, and (b) took a bath, the Defendant was able to ask the victim for a presentation of identification cards to enter the room. On September 25, 2019, the Defendant: (a) spawd the Defendant’s bath; (b) spawd the Defendant’s bomb; and (c) spawd the victim’s right bomb; and (d) 14 days of the victim’s right bomb; and (c) spawd the victim got off

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the accused's legal statement, investigation report (field status), part of the injury of C, and a coffee/cat photograph used for committing the crime, 112 reported case handling report/injury diagnosis sheet (C), opinion on the application of statutes;

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 discretionary mitigation;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of punishment by law: Six months to five years;

2. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the determination of types] the special injury, repeated crime [the first category] special injury [the special person] mitigated element of punishment (including a serious effort to recover damage): the mitigated range of punishment [the recommended area and the scope of recommended punishment], the mitigated range of punishment [the range of recommended punishment], four months to one year [the scope of recommended punishment revised according to the applicable sentences] imprisonment for six months and one year (the lowest limit of the applicable punishment under Acts).

3. The Defendant, who made a decision on a sentence, made the victim’s face of a coffee so that he/she left the victim’s face and "in the face of the victim" is more important.

However, taking into account the fact that the Defendant received a letter from the victim and that the Defendant was assaulted by the victim, etc., such as breathing the breath, etc., the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions shown in