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

1. On November 23, 2013, at around 13:40 on November 23, 2013, the Defendant and C have a dispute over business issues while drinking alcohol in the “F” restaurant operated by the Victim E-C.

In the process, the victim's market value of 420,000 won was enclosed by each other, and the victim's property was damaged by collecting 4,20,00 won, 3, 5, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant jointly damaged the victim's property in conjunction with C.

2. At the time and place set forth in paragraph 1, the Defendant assaulted the victim C (39 years of age) by taking the victim into account the victim who was in periled things, and by taking the victim into consideration, at the time and place set forth in paragraph 1, for the said reasons.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim as a dangerous object.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs and estimates on damage;

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act for a crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (i.e., that there are points to consider the circumstances of the crime, since the defendant was committed in response to the violence of the other party);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that there is no criminal record of fines or heavier punishment for the accused and the fact that it is against the accused);