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

On August 13, 2012, from around 00:40 to around 01:00, the Defendant performed drinking, such as the victim D (the age of 606 and 1204) who was the wife of the Gyeonggi-do, the residence of the Defendant, and went through a dispute. On the other hand, the Defendant saw the entire body from the victim on the ground that the victim was breadated with her bucks, walked the whole body at several times due to the victim's occurrence of her buck, taken the part of the kitchen which is a dangerous object in the kitchen, and taken the end of the kitchen the part of the victim's left part and divided it into the part of the victim's treatment, so it is impossible to know the number of days of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Scenic photographs of each on-site, photographs of the victim, kitchen and knives thereof;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to emergency measures reports;

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) and 3 (3) of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. of Crimes, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (i.e., minor injury of the victim, the victim does not wish to punish the defendant, a contingent crime, and a reflective fact);

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds that the suspended execution is more than Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the grounds for discretionary mitigation);