A seized kitchen (No. 1) shall be confiscated.

At around 22:10 on February 18, 2015, the Defendant: (a) placed in hand a knife (16cm in knife length) a knife (16cm in knife length) which is a dangerous object in the knife of the victim, on the ground that the victim D, who is an son, reports only a mobile phone without hearing her horses at the defendant’s house located in the knife C, and put the victim a knife of a knife that requires approximately three weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Each police statement of E and D;

1. Seizure record and list;

1. Each photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to psychological records, written decisions, investigation reports (including attached documents);

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. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act is deemed to have been committed by the defendant with the kitchen knife with the shoulder part of the child, and the crime of this case is deemed to have been committed by the victim with heavy nature in consideration of the target of the crime, the method of the crime, the degree of damage, etc., but it seems that the victim's son did not want the punishment of the defendant, but it seems to have been because the defendant merely provided economic support.

However, considering all of the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant is against the crime, and there is no criminal conviction exceeding the fine, and that the victim seems to have caused the defendant to commit the crime by acting without a somewhat brusation, etc., the punishment shall be determined like the order.