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

1. On October 15, 2012, around 00:40 on October 15, 2012, the Defendant: (a) stated that “E” (E) operated by the victim D in Daejeon-gu Daejeon-gu), without any justifiable reason, the Defendant took a bath to F, who is an employee of the said main shop, “I am greeatha, dead, dead, and ambatha, I am ambatha,” and obstructed the victim’s main business by avoiding disturbance.

2. On October 2012, at around 01:20, the Defendant: (a) sought again at the main points specified in paragraph (1) of Article 1; (b) without any justifiable reason, and (c) took a bath to the victim D (hereinafter referred to as “a bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bit of bits,

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of each statute on police statements made to D and F;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that a defendant has the history of having been sentenced to imprisonment, suspension of execution, etc. over several occasions due to the same crime, and the defendant is in depth against the defendant, and the victim does not want the punishment against the defendant by mutual consent with the victim, and the execution of imprisonment shall be suspended by taking account of other materials on the oral arguments and other materials on the sentencing, and the sentence

Public Prosecution Rejection Parts

1. The summary of the facts charged was found at around October 2012 at around 01:20, the Defendant assaulted the victim’s face at one time on drinking, by putting the victim D (here, bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit bit,

2. This part of the facts charged is against the clearly expressed will of the victim by falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act.