2. Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

Defendant

A and B are the working hours working together in "D", a Chinese restaurant in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon.

Defendant

A around 08:50 on April 21, 2020, around the house of the victim B (53 years of age) in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon around 08:50, around the preceding day, the victim waitings for the victim to take retaliation against the victim during the dispute with the victim due to a holiday-day problem, but finds the victim who was fright to leave the house in order to work, and finds the victim's face and the body part of the victim's face and the body part of the victim's body can take part in drinking to the victim's face, and caused the victim's injury, such as a frightter, if it is necessary to take approximately 6 weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. B Legal statement;

1. Some police interrogation protocol of the defendant A;

1. A medical certificate of injury, and a place where release and nursing are planned;

1. Photographs description and case-related photograph;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to CDs for video-recording images that occur at the scene;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and subparagraph A of the choice of criminal punishment: Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Defendant A: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation Defendant A: Determination on the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. The summary of the assertion is that Defendant A does not support the victim’s body part to walk.

2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the trial of the court below, namely, the victim made a statement from the investigative agency to the date and time and place indicated in the facts of the crime to the court of law that the defendant had taken his face into consideration by drinking, and thereafter, the defendant abused the victim's body that he was going beyond the court of law by walking. The above statement is consistent and contradictory, and the credibility of the statement is doubtful.