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 2016, the Defendant opened a door, which is a deadly deadly weapon (5cm in length on the day) prepared in advance, and intruded into the house of the victim, on the ground that the victim D, which was located in Tong Young-si around 10:00, came to come to the house of the victim, and the dispute was brought about with the victim due to land ownership issues, and then threatened the victim with a view to causing any harm to the victim’s life or body, unless he hearss his horse.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 284, 283(1) (a) and 320 and 319(1) (a) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment (a special intimidation and a punishment by imprisonment);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. According to Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, the following conditions of sentencing are equally taken into account: (a) the reason for and details of the crime committed; (b) the motive and method of the crime; and (c) the risk of the commission of the crime; (d) the accused’s mistake; (c) the victim does not want the punishment against the accused; (d) the victim does not have any criminal record exceeding the fine; and (e) the Defendant’s age, sex, and occupation.