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

On July 2, 2016, at around 19:50, the Defendant, within “C” factory operated by the Defendant located in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, as well as the victim D (the age of 56) and threatened the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant, while holding a stop, stop, caused the Defendant to misincing the stop the s top the stop, he was in danger of the stop (the total length of 20 cm and 9.5 cm in length).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning D police statements;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 284 and 283 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. The rationale for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act lies in the following facts: (a) the Defendant has a large number of force on violent crimes, including punishment; and (b) the Defendant’s violent inclinations are different in light of the excessive use of dangerous articles.

However, after being sentenced to one year of imprisonment for violent crime in 2002, only three fines have been imposed, and the victim who was well aware of it and the high saw has committed a contingent crime and the victim actively wanted to take advantage of the favorable circumstances.

In consideration of the conditions of sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined within the recommended range of the sentencing criteria and the execution of the punishment shall be suspended.