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

On June 6, 2013, at around 16:45, the Defendant: (a) stated that the victim F (18 years of age) who is the Defendant’s son was released from the third floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 1st, and that “I will not get out of the 18th floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 195 North-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Da-gu Ma, the Defendant Do-gu said that the Mader’s disease, which is a dangerous object of destroying the Madro on the ground that “I will not get out of it

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and threatened the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs;

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime concerned, and Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Although there are circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “Suspension of Execution”) is a shoulderer who is a dangerous object of the defendant, and the risk is high, and that the victim is the child of the defendant, it seems that the possibility of criticism is higher. Meanwhile, there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, and there are favorable circumstances for the defendant, such as the following: all such circumstances; the motive, circumstance, means and method of the crime of this case; the circumstances before and after the crime of this case; the defendant’s age, character, behavior, career, environment, etc. as shown in the argument of this case; and the punishment is determined as ordered.