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

At around 12:30 on October 16, 2019, the Defendant: (a) stated that the victim C(59 years of age) was 13, more than her children, who had been parked in the front of Suwon-si B, that she would be “here for marriage”; (b) taken away the knife (26 cm in total length, 14 cm in length on the day) of the Defendant’s vehicle where she was parked, and her knife the victim by carrying dangerous things.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C's written statement;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. Application of seized articles, photographs and on-site photographs Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act, Articles 284 and 283 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of punishment by law: One to seven years of imprisonment;

2. The scope of recommendation [decision of types] according to the sentencing guidelines, and the scope of intimidation [Type 4], the basic area where there is no repeated crime, special intimidation (special sponsor] (the scope of recommendation and recommendation], and the basic area where there is no punishment (the scope of recommendation and recommendation), and April through June.

3. Based on the above sentencing criteria based on the above sentencing criteria, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in full view of the following circumstances, the defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records:

In light of the crime tools of disadvantageous judgment, etc., since the nature of the crime is not good, and the victim seems to have been satisfed at the time of committing the crime, there is a need to strictly punish the victim.

There was no agreement with the victim.

There is a history of criminal punishment twice for the same violent crime.

A favorable normal defendant has recognized his fault to commit a crime, and shows his attitude to reflect it.

There seems to be some circumstances to consider the circumstances of crimes.