[criminal records] The Defendant was sentenced to two years of embezzlement by the Seoul Central District Court on July 31, 2012, and was released on June 30, 2014 from the Seoul Southern Prison on parole on the execution of the sentence, and the parole period expired on October 21, 2014.

[2] On December 9, 2016, at around 21:30, the Defendant drinking alcohol with the victim J(50 years of age) who was working club in Pyeongtaek-si and around 21:30, the Defendant took 6 times the victim’s face by hand, taken 7 times the victim’s left side part and the head part, taken 7 times the victim’s head part, and sustained two times the victim’s head part of the victim’s head, which is a dangerous object on the part of his/her client, and took two times the victim’s head part on the treatment day.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police to J;

1. Written statements of J and K;

1. On-site and damaged side photographs, CCTV images, and closure photographs;

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquire about criminal history and report criminal investigations (verification of the history of repeated crime);

1. Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The instant crime on the grounds of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of amount of punishment is deemed a crime during the period of repeated crime and is not prescribed by a statutory penalty, and thus, a sentence of imprisonment is inevitable.

In determining the term of punishment as stated in the disposition, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and is against the defendant, the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, and the defendant has no record of being punished for extra violence before and after about 20 years prior to the fine, and the crime of this case is not less complicated in light of the specific form of act, the implements of the crime, and the part of the injury, etc., and the defendant was arrested even though he was in the presence of the trial of this case, and the motive and consequence of the crime of this case are identified.