On April 24, 2015, the Defendant: (a) reported that the victim E (3) who was drunk while drinking in another table of table in D public bars at D public bars in Seopopo City C around 01:5 on April 24, 2015 and carried out a dispute with his wife; and (b) the Defendant prevented the victim from doing so.

I think of this, an empty beer who is a dangerous object in the country where he was located, and she saw the victim's head into the part of the victim's head one time, leading the victim to the Gu's seat, leading the victim into the Gu's body, leading the victim several times, and taking the part of the victim's head into account one time by an empty beer who is a dangerous object, the victim's head is open two weeks of treatment for the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

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

1. A report on investigation and a report on investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Articles 258-2 and 257 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (the following conditions favorable to the reasons for sentencing), the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and other various conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument in this case, shall be considered. In particular, the following circumstances should be considered: (a) the instant crime was committed by taking the head of the victim into account by the beerer and beer who is a dangerous object, and causing injury to the victim by taking the head of the victim; (b) the method of the instant crime was highly dangerous; (c) the victim was in danger and highly poor in the form of the crime; (d) the part and degree of the injury, such as conducting a furning operation, etc.; and (d) the Defendant was sentenced to suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor once for a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. in the past and twice, even if the Defendant was sentenced to a fine twice, and even if there was any injury to the victim or not recovered from the injury.

The favorable circumstances: the defendant recognized the crime of this case and suspended the execution of imprisonment.