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

The defendant is between the victim B (V, 29 years of age) and the married couple.

1. Special intimidation: (a) around July 5, 2018, the Defendant collected knife knife knife (25 cm in length on the day) which is a dangerous object that was kept on the clothes room within the boundary of the ward’s residence located in Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, the Defendant: (b) knife knife knife knife knife, knife knife knife knife knife, knife

“The victim was threatened with dangerous articles by carrying them.”

2. The Defendant damaged property by taking away the victim’s mother from the Defendant at the time, time, and place under the above paragraph 1, and destroying the victim’s knive knive knives, and the victim in the place, and jointly owned knives on the floor.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Protocols made by the prosecution against B, video recorded CDs;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to B;

1. Application of various photographs (a knife knife knives), pictures of persons related to the case to Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 284, 283(1), and 366 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act: The defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances before and after the crime, etc. are considered to have been committed several times, and the victim's knife is threatening with a pro rata knife, and thus the nature of the crime is bad: The defendant's fault appears to have been against his fault; the injured party does not want the punishment against the defendant; and the injured party by the unanimous agreement with the injured party does not want the punishment against the defendant, the punishment shall be determined as ordered by the order, in full consideration of the

Rejection of Public Prosecution

1. Facts charged;

A. The Defendant, on July 5, 2018, committed assault and assault, within the boundary of the residence located in the Da, Chungcheongnambuk-do, the Defendant suffered the damage by hand during a dispute with the victim and the money.