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

On May 20, 2014, at around 22:00, the Defendant, while drinking alcohol together with the victim E (year 47) and F, who was a fluence in the construction site at the same time, had different opinions on the method of collecting and drinking alcohol, and brought an dispute with the victim. On May 20, 2014, the Defendant brought the victim’s spathn with a shoulder beer disease and pushed the victim’s spathn with other hand, and continued to put the victim’s spaths into a flab, and continued to put the victim’s spaths into a flab, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and inflicted an injury on the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Investigation report (F telephone conversations for strings);

1. Photographs of the victim and the site of the case;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a commissioned reply;

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as the following grounds for sentencing);

1. The defense counsel's assertion of the defense counsel under Article 62 (1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is alleged to the effect that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case. Thus, according to the above evidence, it cannot be viewed that the defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions, even though he was aware of drinking at the time of the crime of this case, and therefore, the above assertion is rejected.

Grounds for sentencing

1. Determination of types of crimes: Type 1: Habitual injury, repeated injury, and special injury resulting from violent crimes;

2. Determination of the scope of sentence: Reduction area, one year and six months from June to two years (a person who is subject to special mitigation: A person not subject to punishment);

3. The fact that the defendant acknowledges and reflects his mistake, that he agreed with the victim, and that it appears to be a contingent crime;