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

At around 08:28 on August 13, 2014, the Defendant, on the ground that the victim D(the age of 51) who was fighting with his pay staff was not his own letter at the rest room of 'C' on the first floor of 08:28, 2014, the Defendant brought an injury on the victim's head and 5 cm away from the victim's head, which was a dangerous object that was kept in the rest room, and caused the victim's fighting with his pay staff at the rest room of 'C' (the age of 51).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect with respect to E or D;

1. Application of statutes on photographs of damage;

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Special Considerations in favor of the accused among the reasons for sentencing following the suspended sentence);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is not sufficient in light of the attitude and risk of the instant crime

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant reflects his mistake; (b) there was no record of being sentenced to the punishment exceeding the fine until now; (c) the victim does not want the punishment of the Defendant by mutual consent with the victim; and (d) the age, character and conduct and environment of the Defendant; (b) the process and motive leading to the instant crime; and (c) the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the sentence is to be imposed as ordered by taking account