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

The Defendant, at around 10:47 on February 21, 2015, was in the room located in Chungcheongnam-gun Hong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Hongsung-gun on February 21, 2015, to see whether the victim D (59 years old) “Iskh and live well, and the place where people live are located.”

The term "Iskin and do not have a maskland," while she uses a deadly weapon (the blade length: 9.5cm, the total length: 20cm) that was kept under the influence of this maskn, which was used to cut off the normal masp vessel clothes, on the ground that the words "Iskin and do not have a masck death."

The Defendant, as the victim, threatened the victim, thereby threatening the victim by carrying a deadly weapon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. The first statement made by the police against the defendant;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. On-site photographs (the defendant and the defense counsel asserted that there is no satisfy in keeping the excess recorded in the facts constituting the crime as stated in the judgment of the defendant, and that there is no way to make a statement threatening or threatening to

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, i.e., ① the victim consistently states the main parts of the crime of this case from the police investigation to the present court; ② the victim was punished for special injury by taking the defendant into custody at the time and place of the crime; ② the victim was punished for special injury by taking the defendant into custody at the time and place of the crime; ③ the victim appears to have no reason to show the above behavior if the defendant was not threatened; ③ excessive discovery was found at the defendant’s room at the scene of the crime of this case; ③ the defendant threatened the victim at the time of making a statement at the police station within three days after the crime of this case.

Recognizing the fact that the defendant voluntarily submitted excessive charges and considering the fact that the defendant's use of his/her reputation is recognized as excessive, the above argument by the defendant and his/her defense counsel can be sufficiently recognized. Thus, the above argument by the defendant and the defense counsel is without merit.