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

On November 26, 2016, the Defendant: (a) took a dispute with the victim C(49) on the ground that the victim was unlured and unlured at a house located in R&C at R&C at R&C, 200:35 on November 26, 2016; (b) took the part of the victim’s head on the part of the main; (c) taken one time the victim’s head on the part of the main; and (d) taken one time of the victim’s entrance to drinking, the Defendant got the victim’s head on the part of the number of days of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement concerning C in a protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the police;

1. Statement in the first statement protocol made by the police against D;

1. Entry of damaged photographs and application of the video Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing grounds repeated) (the sentencing criteria are not yet set out for special injury crimes under Article 258-2 of the Criminal Act, which was newly established on January 6, 2016, and thus, the sentencing criteria are not applicable.)

In the instant special injury crime, only imprisonment is prescribed as statutory penalty, and the lower limit is one year.

However, the punishment shall be mitigated and the execution thereof shall be suspended by taking into account the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime, the fact that the injured party does not want the punishment of the defendant before the prosecution (Evidence Record 41, 53, 57 pages).