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

On September 24, 2016, at least 14:45, the Defendant: (a) placed a vehicle on the side because the victim G (the age of 36) who driven a F Lastring vehicle (the age of 36) who was driving a Switzerland vehicle while driving a Switzerland vehicle on the front side of Mapo-gu Seoul, Seoul, brought about a warning against the Defendant; (b) placed the vehicle on the side, while the Defendant stopped the vehicle immediately front of the victim’s vehicle.

After cutting down kickers for camping ( approximately 40 cm in total length, about 15 cm in length) within one’s twit line, the Defendant: (a) threatened the victim with the driver’s seat, and continuously threatened the victim with the victim, who was seated in the driver’s seat; (b) threatening the victim to open a driver’s seat and to threaten the victim’s knife with the knife’s hand knife; and (c) fightd the victim’s knife with the left hand.

As a result, the defendant carried dangerous objects with violence to the victim, thereby suffering damage to the victim's reputation that requires medical treatment for about two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement related to H and G;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the victim's bodily injury, photograph, seized articles and photographs;

1. Articles 262, 261, 260 (1), and 258-2 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “the grounds for discretionary mitigation”), among favorable circumstances

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (hereinafter “the grounds for a suspended sentence”), which is favorable to the following reasons:

1. For the reason of sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act, the crime of this case is highly likely to cause harm to the body and thus should be subject to criticism.

However, the fact that the defendant agreed with the victim, the defendant has long been guilty of violence and has no criminal records other than punishment, etc., and the age, character and behavior of the defendant are considered as favorable circumstances.