except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

(e).

On January 14, 2014, at around 02:00, the Defendant: (a) dialogueed the victim D (B) B building B (C) at the house of Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon (B) No. 02 (C, 21 years of age) on the part of the victim D (B), who was living in the house of the victim D (B), and had been living in the house before the formation of the frame, and damaged the victim, such as breaking the victim’s Kakakakao Stockholm by reporting it from a man who was living in the city where the victim was aware of his/her reputation, and breaking the victim’s cell phone (B), which was a dangerous object in the victim’s room, and breaking the victim’s market price of the victim’s smartphone (B) at three to four times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Each police statement concerning D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to spphone photographs damaged by divers;

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (including cases where an agreement is made with the victim and it is divided);

1. Of the instant facts charged, the gist of the charge of assaulting each of the instant charges is as follows: (a) the Defendant destroyed the victim’s smartphone at around 02:00 on January 14, 2014; and (b) the male who sent the victim’s Kakakao Stockholm letters at around 02:0, after asking the victim as to whether it would be good for the victim, assaulting the victim’s face at approximately 4-5 times with both hands; and (b) around January 17:20 on January 14, 2014, even if the Defendant again tried the victim at the home of the said victim at around 17:20 on January 20, 2014, the Defendant committed assaulting the victim’s face at around 2-3 times with the victim’s hand.

However, this is a case that falls under Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Code and cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express will under Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Code.

However, according to the statement of withdrawal of a complaint attached to the trial record, the victim, after the prosecution of this case, shall be instituted.