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

On May 2, 2013, at around 23:55, the Defendant threatened the victim with “D”, which was operated by the Defendant’s wife located in Nam-nam, that the victim E (the age of 47) was in in in a incompetuous relationship with the Defendant’s wife, and caused the racker who was in a place of the Defendant’s home, which is a dangerous object ( approximately 35 cm in length), and threatened the victim with the knife ( approximately 39.5 cm in total length, approximately 26 cm in length), which is a dangerous object that continued to have been in the Defendant’s home ( approximately 39.5 cm in length, about 26 cm in length).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime concerned, and Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Mitigation of discretionary work and mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the fact that the victim has agreed smoothly with the victim and that his/her mistake has been pened in depth and reflected therein);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (In addition to the grounds for discretionary mitigation, various circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, home environment, and circumstances after committing the crime, etc. recorded in the records of this case);

1. Probation and community service order shall be decided as ordered by the court on the grounds of Article 62-2 or more of the Criminal Act;