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

1. The Defendant, on March 31, 2017, 205:0, was drunk on the second floor B of Busan Metropolitan City around 05:00, and was frightened by the victim C (at the age of 56) who was frightened by the Defendant, and was frightened by the Defendant, who was frightened from the phone.

The purport of the "licker" is that the victim's face is "hicker" and the victim's body is hicker by hand and kicking the victim's hair into the floor, leaving the victim's head head knicks several times, leaving the manb on the floor, leaving the victim's hacks the part and head hacks the victim's hacks the victim's hacks, taking the victim's hacks the part and head hacks the victim's hacks on a hand, and hacks the victim's hacks the victim's hacks that require approximately two weeks' treatment on both sides.

2. The Defendant, at the above date and place, destroyed KRW 257,00 of the repairing cost by cutting off the 112 mobile phone from the jumal jum which is the victim’s ownership and destroying the 112 report.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as photographs, etc. of injuries, card receipts, and medical certificate of injury;

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. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing in Articles 62-2(1) and 62-2(2) proviso of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection and observation [the scope of recommendation] general injury [the scope of recommendation]] [the victim who is vulnerable to the crime [the victim who is a special mitigated] who is vulnerable to the crime [the victim] who is vulnerable to the crime [the victim [the person who is subject to special aggravated punishment] [the defendant] repeated the crime of this case despite the fact that the defendant was subject to family protective disposition due to violent crimes against the victim who is the wife, and the degree of injury to the victim is not somewhat weak.

However, the defendant committed the crime of this case.