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.

around 00:00 on October 23, 2015, the Defendant was in sight of the victim’s breath on the front road of Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu, Seoul, for the reason that she had a mutual eye with the victim C (28 tax). The Defendant was booming the victim’s breath, and was booming the victim’s snow with drinking.

As a result, the Defendant got off the body of the wall and the wall to the victim for about five weeks of treatment.

[Defendant and defense counsel at the time of the above crime that the defendant was physically and mentally in a state of mental disorder

The argument is asserted.

From May 21, 2015 to July 10, 2015, the Defendant recognized that the Defendant received hospitalized treatment as “accomponation of impulse control force, advanced climatic part” increase in the term “from May 21, 2015.”

However, in light of the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s legal attitude and statement, etc., it is not deemed that the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime.

Therefore, the above argument shall not be accepted.

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to certificates of injury diagnosis, certificates of medical records;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. The sentencing of Articles 25(1), 31(1), 31(2), and 31(3) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Acknowledgement of Application for Compensation Orders and the Promotion, etc. of Provisional Execution Proceedings [Scope of Recommendation] has no basic area (from April to one year and six months), (i.e., special sentencing factors] [decision of sentencing] [decision of sentencing] under the following circumstances, depending on the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances after committing the crime, etc.

The fact that there is no record of criminal punishment except for those who have been sentenced twice to the suspension of indictment due to the crime of interference with worship and the crime of violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act - the fact that the victim's misunderstanding case began to be disadvantageous - the fact that there is a lack of efforts to recover damage even though it is somewhat serious damage.