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

On March 10, 2020, the Defendant: (a) around 11:45 on March 10, 2020, at the “C” restaurant parking lot located in the Geum-gu Busan Metropolitan City, the Defendant: (b) thought that the victim D, working for the Defendant, did not have a good answer to the Defendant’s employees; and (c) caused the Defendant’s injury to the bed of the mouth of the fluor, under the left side of the victim’s face and the flusing of the flusium that requires approximately six weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report of injury to the police statement of D (Attachment to the security guards and addition to CCTV images);

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is relatively heavy; the defendant is recognized to commit the instant crime, and the defendant deposits the amount of KRW 10 million for the victim, and the defendant wishes to recover additional damage according to the result of the future civil litigation in the future; the defendant called the victim's telephone conversations before the instant crime; and the victim's statement that "I know about...................." It seems to be reasonable to consider the defendant's statement that caused the instant crime by an examination of the defendant in the workplace within the workplace (the victim's police statement). The defendant's statement that there is no history of performing the same violent crime; the defendant's age, character and behavior, the motive and circumstances of the environmental crime, etc.; and the prosecutor's opinion on the sentencing (three million won) as stated in the instant argument.