1. On July 15, 2013, at around 06:45, the Defendant entering a residence studio, where the victim E (at the age of 23) living in the original city (at the age of 23) is living, the Defendant removed the shock network of the above studio toilet windows, and went into the victim’s room through the above window after the opening.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the victim's residence.

2. The Defendant, upon the time, at the time, at the place, and upon the Defendant’s intrusion, frightened the victim’s knife with the victim’s knife with the victim’s knife with another hand, and frighted to the victim, the Defendant flicked the victim with the victim’s knife.

The defendant who was divingd by the victim was the victim, and the victim was involved in the victim's male condition, occupation, etc., and the victim was frighted so that the victim was frighted to drinking, so that the victim was asked about the danger and injury of drinking, and the defendant was asked about the defect " frighten, she was frighten," and again frighted to the victim.

After that, the defendant, as the victim escaped out of the toilet, and the defendant got out of the toilet, after the victim's back, let the victim go out of the above house, and let the victim go out of the above house, and requested to assist the operator of the mutual infab restaurant in the trade name, in the above house location, he brought about the victim's hand to the victim's hand, and let the victim get out of the victim's hand, and let the victim get out of the rest of the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on prosecutor's statement to E;

1. Relevant Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of intrusion upon residence, the choice of imprisonment), and Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of intimidation and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act was removed from the window screen of the victim’s residence, which is not known at all.