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

At around 02:10 on October 10, 2018, the Defendant and the 5th floor of the CPublic Notification Board located in the building in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, provided that the Defendant and the 52-year residents of the above Gosiwon, who were the occupants of the above Gosiwon, protested against the said Gosiwon, on the part of the said Gosiwon D, in order to send the victim with the above Gosiwon D, the victim E (the 52-yearssss) to move out of the said Gosiwon D, and the victim's back to the lower part of the 4th floor, cut off the victim under the stairs. In the process, the Defendant suffered from the victim's elbow in the water tank sofed, resulting in the victim's injury, such as a blue blueing sobing the left end of the 14th unit, and caused the victim's injury.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Each of the legal statements made by the witness F and G (not including the part of the professional statement made by the accused);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each photograph and diagnostic document;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 257 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. The main point of the claim is that the Defendant did not have any citizens in the direction of the fourth floor stairs by getting the victim's back and getting the victim's back, and the victim was injured by getting out of the stairs under the influence of alcohol.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, namely, police officers F, G, etc., who were dispatched to the scene of the instant crime after receiving a report at the scene of the instant crime and received the instant case by voluntarily accompanying the Defendant. G, if a common suspect denies the commission of a crime, the fact that the Defendant was not stated in the voluntary accompanying report that the Defendant denies the commission of a crime, but did not entirely drink on the date of the instant crime among the victim’s statements.