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

The defendant and the victim B(the age of 46) are those who are engaged in computer repair work together with those who are engaged in computer repair work, and they are post-school operators.

At around 00:30 on April 14, 2016, the Defendant, at the victim’s house located in Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Carryover 102 on the ground that the victim used public funds for the future use of the public funds, was in a dispute, and the victim was able to have his head, which is a dangerous object, collected about 2-3 times, and was fested about 7cm with the victim’s head, which was fested to the degree of 7cm with the victim’s number of days of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of the police as to B;

1. Records of seizure, the list of seizure, and odor photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of punishment by law: One year to ten years;

2. Where the mitigated area (one year and six months to two years), the mitigated area (one year and six months), the penal penalty (including advanced efforts to recover damage), or considerable damage is recovered according to the sentencing guidelines;

3. In light of the fact that a sentence of sentence was rendered in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc.) around 2013, a sentence of imprisonment with prison labor and a sentence of two-year imprisonment with prison labor in one year and six months, and the records of punishment for violent crimes are possible, and that the head of the victim was imprudented and that the crime is bad in terms of the risk of the act is committed.

On the other hand, the agreed point with the victim is favorable.

In light of the above circumstances, the above sentencing criteria are premised on the application of Article 3(1) of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act prior to the establishment of Article 258-2 of the Criminal Act, and the sentencing criteria are set aside beyond the lower limit of the sentencing criteria and the punishment is set like