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

On December 10, 2019, at around 23:25, the Defendant: (a) had the victim D (27 years of age) who is an employee of the partner company in the ward in Ulsan-gu apartment B apartment unit C, Ulsan-gu; (b) had the desire of the victim; (c) had the victim heard the desire from the victim; and (d) had the victim take the part on the right side of the victim one time due to dangerous small-scale illness; and (e) had the victim take the part on the right side of the victim for about 14 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of E and D;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged parts;

1. Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as “reasons for discretionary mitigation”), which is favorable to the defendant, is considered in light of circumstances favorable to the defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the repeated consideration of conditions favorable to the above defendant);

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

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Six to five years of imprisonment;

2. Scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines [Determination of types]. Special injury by special injury and repeated crime [Class 1] Special injury [Special Contributor] mitigated element: In cases where the penalty is not imposed or considerable damage is recovered, [the scope of the recommended area and the recommended sentence] mitigated range, imprisonment for four months to one year [the scope of the recommended sentence revised according to the applicable sentencing range] for six months and one year (the lowest limit of the sentencing range recommended by the sentencing guidelines is different from the lowest limit of the applicable sentencing range in law, and thus the minimum limit of the applicable sentencing range is applicable in law).

3. The fact that the method of committing the crime is very dangerous by causing injury to the victim by means of making a decision on the sentence of punishment, and that the person has been punished once as a suspended sentence of imprisonment for the same kind of crime, and that the person has been punished several times of a fine is disadvantageous.

It is advantageous to the fact that the victim has agreed with the victim by endeavoring for the recovery of damage, that the defendant reflects his depth and repents, and that the social relationship seems clear.

(b) other.