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

On June 1, 2013, at around 02:10 on June 1, 2013, the Defendant walked to the victim D, waiting for the crosswalk signal in front of the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, without any justifiable reason, when the victim resists, she taken the face of the victim by drinking, taken the head of the victim over the ground, and taken off the victim's left hand on the floor. On the part of the victim, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as cutting down the 3 balance of the left water, which requires about 5 weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning suspect examination of D;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime: Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Special circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant reflects his depth, the fact that the victim deposited two million won with the victim, and the fact that the defendant has no criminal record for the same kind of crime);

1. Social service order: The defendant asserts that he was in a state of mental disorder or mental retardation under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime. The records show that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental retardation under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime. However, in light of the defendant’s ordinary amount of alcohol, the background leading up to the instant crime, the method and method of committing the crime, the defendant’s behavior before and after committing the instant crime, etc., the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Since it is not recognized that the defendant was in a state or weak condition, the above assertion by the defendant is rejected.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.