The defendant was the couple who reported the marriage on September 7, 2012 between the victim B (n, 35 years of age) and the two parties, and the divorce lawsuit between the two parties became final and conclusive by the Supreme Court decision on December 13, 2018.

The defendant from around 23:00 on August 23, 2013 to the same year.

8. Around 24. 02:00, a man who had different males' mobile phones from the victim's mobile phones in Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu, Seoul, sent the victim's mobile phones with their fingers, and the victim's fingers with a knife knife, which is an object dangerous in the kitchen, and then taken the knife with the knife with the knife, which is a broad knife of the knife, the victim's shoulder, knife with the knife, knife, knife, and the victim's face, eye, body, etc. cannot be identified by the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and inflicted an injury on the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Deficial photo of an injury;

1. Application of the Seoul Family Court Act and subordinate statutes;

1. Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. The summary of the judgment on the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that both the arms and legs and the mouth and the mouth transfusion of the bridge are merely a minor body capable of natural therapy and do not constitute injury. Even if the blood transfusion of the inside and outside is damaged by concession, the food knife, which is a dangerous object, was not used for the blood transfusion of the inside and outside, is merely a concurrent crime of special assault and injury.

In the case of a family affairs investigator, the defendant himself saw that he unilaterally assaulted the victim for one-hour old age by explosioning the net labor, and caused the victim to die with her head, her click, arms, etc. on the floor of hand.