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

On May 12, 2019, the Defendant: (a) around 00:20, at Cjus located in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si B, and (b) while fighting with the victim, the Defendant was at the price of the face of the Defendant from the victim, and the beer disease, which is a dangerous object on the table table, made the victim’s face one time, and had no two open measures that require approximately two weeks of treatment.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and inflicted an injury on the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of police suspect regarding D;

1. E statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigative reports (to make a statement of a shote, telephone conversations, and submit a certificate of injury);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of criminal facts;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (the following grounds for sentencing) of the suspended sentence;

1. Scope of punishment by law: Six months to five years;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [Determination of types]. Special injury, repeated crime (special person in a form No. 1] Special injury (special person in a form): In the event that victims are fully responsible for the occurrence of or the expansion of damage to a crime, non-won [the scope of the recommended area and the scope of the recommended punishment] special mitigation area, two months through one year [the scope of the recommended punishment corrected by the applicable sentencing guidelines] sentenced to six months to one year (the minimum limit of the sentencing range recommended by the sentencing guidelines is different from the applicable sentencing range under law, and thus the minimum limit of the applicable sentencing range under law is different from the applicable sentencing range).

3. In light of the content of the instant crime, the liability for the crime is not somewhat minor in light of the type of the crime in this case committed by the defendant who was sentenced to the sentence, due to the beer disease of a dangerous object;

In the past, the defendant has been punished twice as a violent crime in the past.

However, the defendant commits a crime.