However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On 16:00 on 16:00 on 25, 2014, the Defendant listened to the Defendant’s side table D (52 years of age) sound, which was boomed on the Defendant’s side table table, in the C cafeteria located in the Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Yandong-gu, Seoul, about 16:0, the Defendant used the victim’s side table three times, and used the victim’s back table (19cm on the back side) with the victim’s back table, which is a dangerous object in the back part of the victim’s back, and used the victim’s back table (19cm on the back part) one time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Description in D's self-written statements;

1. Application of each video statute to the suspect and on-site photographs, crimes committed, refinites and photographs for reinforcing bars;

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

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (i.e., circumstances favorable to the following reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( repeatedly considering the favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for not less than six months but not more than fifteen years;

2. The scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines (decision of types of punishment), the range of violent crimes, and the absence of any type 6 (Special Violence) from among assault crimes (the scope of recommendations) (the scope of recommendations), from 6 months to 10 months;

3. Determination of sentence: A punishment shall be determined as ordered in accordance with various sentencing conditions set forth in the arguments of this case, including the following facts: the defendant, who was sentenced to a stay of six months in prison and two years in prison, was guilty of committing a crime that was likely to inflict serious bodily injury on the victim, the victim was punished, the defendant was presumed to have initial and contingent crimes, and the defendant appears to have committed a crime, and the defendant appears to have been against himself/herself while leading to a confession of the crime, and the defendant appears to be against himself/herself in light of various sentencing conditions set forth in the arguments of this case, such as his/her age, character, behavior and environment.