1. Crimes committed on October 30, 2016;

On October 30, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 18:00, at the house of the victim D (the 84 years of age, south) located in Chuncheon C and 711 Dong, and (b) had been urged by the victim to complete payment of KRW 10,000,000 that he borrowed from the victim for the past, and (c) had a part of the victim’s head, which is a dangerous object that had been on the floor, several times, and had a part of the victim’s head, and had a part of the victim’s eye due to drinking, caused the victim’s injury, such as a arms blue, blue, having no open one, for about two weeks of treatment. Accordingly, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by carrying dangerous things.

2. The crime committed on March 14, 2017;

Around 14:40 on March 14, 2017, the Defendant drinked alcoholic beverages at the same place, and “A fine has been imposed for the last time due to feasible feass,” to the victim A himself. The Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by carrying with E, etc. the scam of plastic material, which is a dangerous object in which the victim had drinking together with E, with E, and 42§¯ of the head of the victim. By doing so, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by carrying the victim’s face part of the plastic material, which is a dangerous object in which the victim had drinking together with E, and 60cm in length and 42cm in length. By doing so, the Defendant sustained the victim by carrying the dangerous thing, such as an open head part requiring a detailed treatment of the victim for about three weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D, E, and F;

1. A copy of medical record, a report on investigation (a counter investigation by a doctor), a report on investigation (investigation into the situation at the time of withdrawal), a report on the occurrence and autopsy of each special injury incident, a report on dispatch to each scene of violence, a site photograph, each medical certificate, and a victim photograph;

[Defendant and defense counsel asserted that on October 30, 2016, the defendant only supported the victim once, and on March 14, 2017, the victim et al. only once, and that there was no assault and injury by booming the victim, which is a dangerous object, due to booming. However, in full view of the following: (a) the victim may sufficiently be recognized as having inflicted an injury on the victim in the same manner as the criminal facts in the judgment of the defendant; (b) the victim was injured by the defendant from the investigative agency to this court under the same circumstance as the criminal facts in the judgment of the defendant.

② At the time of October 30, 2016, the Defendant and the victim reported the following day and the police officer called to “at the same time, the Defendant observed the scene of assaulting the victim on three occasions at the same time during the breath of drinking alcohol together (Evidence List 8 No. 15)” (Evidence List No. 8) and the police station on November 9, 2016 and made a detailed statement to the same effect (Evidence List No. 15), which is consistent with the victim’s statement.

③ At the time of March 14, 2017, F, who was, and was, with the Defendant and the victim, was dispatched to the scene after receiving a report on the same day, stated that “the Defendant was present at the scene of the violence incident No. 18 of the evidence list)” (the dispatch report at the scene of the violence case No. 18 of the evidence list), and that it conforms with the statement of the victim (the statement No. 23 of the evidence list) while attending the police station on April 23, 2017.

④ A police officer’s statement is supported by the victim’s statement (Article 7 and No. 17 of the Evidence List), such as the victim’s state of witness, the boomed situation, and the location of the boomed boomed and the site where a police officer was dispatched to the site on October 31, 2016 and March 14, 2017 (Evidence List 8 and 18).

⑤ In particular, it is reasonable to view the degree of injury of the victim immediately after the case is acknowledged through a diagnosis certificate (Evidence List Nos. 1, 11, 21), victim’s photograph (Evidence List No. 9, 13, and 19) as an injury caused by an assault, such as the criminal facts in the judgment, rather than that caused by an assault, such as the circumstance alleged by the defendant.

6) It is true that there are many parts of the victim D, witness E, and F’s legal statement lack of consistency with the investigative agency’s statement, or that their memory is unclear, or that the statement itself lacks rationality. However, in light of the victim’s age, health condition, and the degree of recognition ability expressed in the process of the court’s statement, etc., it appears as a result of the occurrence of the victim’s and witness’s oral statement that the victim and witness’s witness’s overall credibility cannot be rejected solely on such circumstances because they are confused with the case on October 30, 2016 and March 14, 2017, because their memory was rare or recognition ability was lower than ordinary people.

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Each Criminal Code Article 258-2 (Aggravated Injury)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 110, Nov. 18, 2015) provides that the defendant mobilized a dangerous object to inflict serious injury on an elderly victim. Although the defendant was investigated into the case of injury on October 30, 2016, committing the crime of injury on March 14, 2017, it is bad to have the nature of the crime. The victim appears to have suffered considerable physical or mental pain due to the instant case, and the victim wants to be punished by the defendant. The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, suspended sentence for two years, which became final and conclusive on November 26, 2015, and the defendant did not appear to have an advantage to each of the instant defendants, and the defendant's health and conduct should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances: the defendant's health and conduct were not favorable to each of the instant crimes.

quasi-examination shall be taken into account only as reference material.