Of the facts charged of this case, the prosecution against each of the assaults is dismissed.

On October 14, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to four years of imprisonment for robbery, etc. by the Incheon District Court, and completed the execution of the sentence on June 27, 2015.

The Defendant, around 23:50 on April 1, 2016, 2016, "2017 Highest 232" (injury, damage to property) was admitted to the customer as the victim D (75 taxes) of the victim D (75 taxes) located in Ansan-si, A. 305 of the Maurter managed by the Maur 305 of the Maur-si, and brought the charge for the mobile phone distribution by making the phone call to the Maurter, and brought the victim at two times. However, the Defendant demanded the Maur 2 to refund the carter where the victim was the victim, but the victim was not able to move to the Maur. However, the Defendant Maur 2 took the face of the victim by her hand on the ground that the victim was not able to open the Maur 305.

As a result, the defendant injured the victim about 8 weeks of treatment, such as inside walls and alleys that require treatment, and damaged 200,000 won of repair expenses.

Summary of Evidence

[2017 Highest 232]

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Each statement of D and F;

1. A photograph of the damaged person, a photograph of the damaged person's indoors 305, and a written diagnosis of the injury;

1. Previous conviction: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, text 4 copies of the judgment, current status of acceptance by each individual, and investigation report (verification of suspect A's date on which the period of punishment for robbery expires) shall be made;

1. Relevant Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury), Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

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

1. The injury was inflicted by assaulting the victim on the ground that the sentencing reason for Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act was minor.

There are many criminal records of the same kind.

The instant crime is a crime committed during the period of repeated crime.

There was no recovery of damage.

Other motive for crime, etc.