1. On August 2, 2017, the injured Defendant: (a) called “A victim E (3) (48 years old) who was seated in D Park in Gangseo-si, Gangnam-si, and without any reason, in D Park in D Park (14:20 on August 2, 2017; (b) C, “Aplow in the territory of the Republic of Korea; (c) is a wild horse in which he fell; (d) in the territory of this Dong-dong; (d) the injured Defendant saw the victim’s face over 10 times by putting the victim’s neck on the top of the upper floor; and (e) the victim’s face was skeed with both descendants.

As a result, the defendant put the victim into the left-hand head's top-hand head in need of approximately two weeks of treatment.

2. On August 11, 2017, the Defendant attempted robbery: (a) at D Park around 16:50 on August 11, 2017, the Defendant knew of the fact that the victim F (40 years old) who was seated was in cash possession, and demanded the victim to purchase the victim’s money at the main place, but the victim was refused from the victim; (b) had the victim take the victim’s money at his/her hand; (c) had the victim taken the victim’s seat with his/her seat at the park; (d) had the victim taken the victim’s face at five times, she took the victim’s seat at the park; and (d) had the victim take the victim’s neck with his/her hand and took the victim’s cash against other hand, but did not have attempted to take the victim’s face strongly by taking the victim’s sound.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to E;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (or choice of bodily injury or imprisonment), Articles 342 and 333 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Mitigation of attempted punishment: Articles 25(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

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. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion regarding the small amount mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act was in a state of mental and physical weakness due to intellectual disability at the time of committing the instant crime.