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

around 01:00 on June 7, 2017, the Defendant: (a) had talked with the Victim C (11) who was son at the Defendant’s house No. 701, B apartment house No. 1, 701, and her house; (b) thought that the victim would have made a false speech while she talked with her friendship in the school; and (c) caused the victim’s head, etc. four times on his/her hand by her hand, with his/her head, etc. every four times; (d) caused the victim’s injury to the victim by walking his/her left arms two times, and at the same time, engaged in physical abuse that may harm the physical health and development of the child.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. A family relation certificate of the person under consideration and a resident registration card of the suspect;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing certificates, such as medical certificates;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of harm), Article 71 (1) 2, and subparagraph 3 of Article 17 of the Child Welfare Act (the point of harm) concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Taking into account the following factors: (a) the degree of injury of a victim on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is large; (b) the defendant commits a mistake; (c) the victim does not want detention of the defendant; and (d) the defendant does not have the same criminal record;