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

1. On July 17, 2012, the Defendant violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively, deadly weapons, etc.) cited and displayed the kitchen length (19cm), which is a dangerous article in his/her house, on the ground that he/she sent text messages to the victim for the reason that he/she had been divided by the 7nd apartment complex C7, 705, 604, from the corridor of 104, in Switzerland-si to the North Korean Support Center for the victim's name instead of the victim D (31 years old). The Defendant threatened the victim, who was found at his/her house, with the issue of sending text messages, by sending text messages to the victim on the ground that he/she had received it on the behalf of the victim D (31 years old).

2. The Defendant injured the Defendant, while she was at the time and place set forth in paragraph 1, did not have a knife the knife of the Defendant’s knife of the victim D with his knife of the knife and her face with his knife and her face with his knife for about twenty (20) days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Examination of suspect suspect regarding D by the prosecution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 2 (1) and 2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the crime (the point of injury and the choice of imprisonment);

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

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see the following reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see the following reasons for sentencing)

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion against the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act. Since the defendant acted in the above manner at the time of the case, the defendant's act constitutes self-defense, the defendant's act is alleged to constitute self-defense. Thus, the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court.