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

At around 20:20 on August 17, 2013, the Defendant, at the main point of “D,” located in “D,” and returned to the inside of the Defendant, when the victim E (the age of 47) who is a customer was able to get out of his/her own her own her own her own her own her own her own her own her own her own her part, left the victim, and the Defendant was her own her own her own her part of the victim’s left her her own her part of the her own her face, and then her her her her her her part of the victim’s face was her her her hand and her part of the victim’s face was her hand.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous things with the victim and carried them about about a week of medical treatment, and the victim was inside the inner area and the face.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (Attachment of a letter of opinion);

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see, e.g., the degree of damage is relatively insignificant, the fact that the victim has agreed to do so smoothly with the victim, and the fact that the victim has made a wrong mistake and reflects);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution;

1. The dismissal of prosecution under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. On July 14, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 23:50 on July 14, 2013, and around 23:50, the Defendant committed assault, such as taking part of the victim’s hair, and taking part of the victim’s hair, and taking part of the victim’s desire to “the same young child” against the victim, on the ground that the victim G (here, 44 years old) living together with the Defendant’s house was entering this framework.

2. The above facts charged are crimes falling under Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent under Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Act. According to the written agreement attached to the records of the trial of this case, the above victim agreed with the defendant after the prosecution of this case and agreed against the defendant.