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

At around 16:50 on September 30, 2014, the Defendant: (a) brought a dispute with the victim E (55 years of age) who was a franchisor of the Defendant’s operation of Ulsan Jung-gu, U.S., on the ground that he was franchisoring a taxi and lending the taxi expenses without a taxi; (b) franchisoring the victim’s bat; and (c) franchisoring the victim’s bat, franchisoring the victim’s bat, and franchisoring the victim’s arms, etc. using the dangerous batp batp, etc. with approximately eight weeks of the victim’s arms.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A criminal investigation report;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime concerned, 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;

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is not less vulnerable to the nature of the crime since the defendant carried dangerous articles and inflicted injury on the victim, and the damage was not recovered.

However, the above punishment shall be determined in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the confession and rebuttal of the defendant, the victim who does not want the punishment against the defendant, the defendant bears part of the medical expenses for the victim, and the defendant has no criminal records since 1993, and other factors of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc.