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

On June 30, 2019, at around 08:00, the Defendant sustained an injury, such as a spathal of a baby, which requires approximately 12 weeks of treatment to the victim, on the face of the victim B (the age of 55) and a spathing, who were standing together in front of the north door of the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan City “Integ Park” in the face of the victim. While the Defendant had a dispute, he/she was suffering from the dispute, he/she had a part of the face of the victim on a hand, and had a part of the face of the victim on several occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. B written statements;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the victim's body photographs, investigation reports (the investigation of the victim and witness), investigation reports (the victim's photograph at the time of investigation), investigation reports (the confirmation of the victim's injury, etc.), each injury diagnosis report, the presumption of future treatment expenses, investigation reports (the confirmation of the scene of crime in CCTV images at the scene), and CCTV photographs taken by the police box;

1. Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one to seven years;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) Determination of types: The General Injury>> (Type 1) of violent crime>

(b) A special breeder: No person;

(c) The scope of recommendations and recommendations: Basic field, imprisonment for not less than two months, but not more than one year and not more than six months; and

3. The fact that the defendant, who has been sentenced to criminal punishment for violent crimes on two occasions, committed the same kind of crime again constitutes an unfavorable sentencing factor.

However, there are extenuating circumstances such as the defendant's acknowledgement of the crime of this case and the fact that it appears to be against the defendant.

In addition to these circumstances and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, the conditions of all the sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, including the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined in the same manner as the order.