On November 27, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. at night in Seoul Southern District Court on November 27, 2014 and six months at Seoul Southern District Court on August 26, 2015, and completed the execution of the final sentence on January 3, 2016.

1. On February 4, 2016, at around 00:10, the Defendant: (a) expressed the attitude that the victim S, “Tju-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si, would have to pay the victim the alcohol value, etc.; (b) ordered the victim to change alcohol and food; and (c) received the delivery of alcohol and alcohol equivalent to KRW 19,000 of the market price, including one bottled rice and one empty rice, from the injured party.

2. The Defendant, on the ground that the date and time set forth in paragraph 1, and at the same place, the victim U (54 U.S. 54) who was a victim in the table 1, was able to reach the Defendant’s age, committed assault against the victim by getting off two parts of the victim’s necks on the table table.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement by the police against S;

1. U statements;

1. Investigation report (the other party investigation of a victim);

1. Text statement;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: References to inquiries, such as criminal history, personal identification and acceptance status, and application of two copies of the judgment text;

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 260 of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. As to the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act by aggravation of concurrent crimes, the Defendant and his defense counsel had been in a state of mental and physical weakness by drinking the Defendant at the time of committing the instant assault crime.

The argument is asserted.

In light of the records of this case, although the defendant was found to have her drinking at the time of the crime of assault of this case, it cannot be seen that the defendant did not have the ability to make a decision or lacks the ability to do so, the above assertion by the defendant and the numberer cannot be accepted.