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

On September 14, 2016, around 18:35, the Defendant: (a) misleads the victim D(55 years of age) residing in Ansan-si C 106, to believe that the victim would have avoided his disturbance to the principal of the house; (b) took a dangerous weapon brought at the house by misunderstanding and interesting that the victim would have avoided his disturbance to the principal of the house; and (c) took a dangerous weapon brought at the house, and (d) the victim “the victim would die with the same disease.” On the other hand, the Defendant opened a studle and carried the studio of the victim; (d) led the victim to the victim’s right-hand studio by keeping the Defendant and threatening the victim.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as cutting down the 2nd place of the well-known knives that require treatment for about six weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of present Acts and subordinate statutes on evidence No. 1;

1. Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination on the application of sentencing guidelines to the reasons of sentencing under Article 48 (1) of the Confiscation Criminal Act: To take into account all circumstances, including the fact that the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant (the written agreement has been submitted after the conclusion of pleadings) in the increased area of Category 1 (General Injury-Bodily Injury) and Category 2 (6-2) in general;