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

The defendant is the adviser of the B organization, and the victim C (year 45) is the one who was the president of the D partnership and is currently disputing the status of representative liquidator.

On November 28, 2019, at around 11:50, the Defendant: (a) laid away a banner that criticizes the victim pursuant to the direction of the B organization to which he belongs; (b) took the victim’s cell phone camera, and (c) took the victim’s cell phone camera, and subsequently took the dangerous object (110cm in length) that he was in possession to install a chemical banner, the Defendant committed several assaults to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol of suspect examination of the accused, making a legal statement C;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. As a result of the reproduction of cell phone image CDs, 【The banner legally installed by the Defendant was cut down in the vicinity of the victim’s body, but it is difficult to accept the argument that the Defendant did not have the intent of assault against the victim at the time of display of the victim, or that the Defendant’s act did not go against social rules, even if the above title did not directly contact the victim’s body, constitutes an unlawful use of force against the victim, and the protection of the portrait rights of the organizer or participant of an open assembly or demonstration is limited. Therefore, it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant’s mobile phone image photographing against the victim was unlawful. In light of the above, it is difficult to accept the legal reasoning that the Defendant did not have the intent of assault against the victim at the time of display of the victim, or that the Defendant’s act does not go against

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 261 and 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment.

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Reasons for Sentencing below)

1. The reason for sentencing of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act is that detention in a workhouse (in a case where the sentence of suspension of execution of imprisonment is invalidated or revoked and the defendant fails to pay a fine).