A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On April 19, 2013, the Defendant, at his own house, 103 303 Dongdong-gu, Busan Metropolitan City D's 103 Do 303, 2013, carried out the house to go out to the Kimhae Airport where her work place had knife a knife (30 cm in total length, 9 cm in daily length) and knife (30 cm in total length, 38 cm in total length, 25 cm in daily length) with a dangerous object, which had been purchased on the Internet before two years to be used in fishing.

On April 19, 2013, at around 13:20, the Defendant: (a) boarded in the back seat of H-si operated by the injured Party G (Nam, 40 years of age) in Fmat in Busan Dong-gu, Busan; (b) provided that “Is to G-si, G-si; (c) smoke in the taxi; and (d) opened a door and opened one string over the taxi.

When the victim prevented the Defendant in front of the “J-cafeteria” located in the same Gu I, the Defendant saw the Defendant as a sudden grandchild and sought to affix the victim, and the Defendant, who gets off the vehicle from the vehicle, was faced with the victim with the knife, who did not live in the vehicle, and who used the victim with dangerous articles, such as displaying the knife to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police seizure records;

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 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (original offenders, victim's not to be punished, and reflectivity);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution ( repeatedly considering the grounds for discretionary mitigation);

1. As to the assertion by the defense counsel under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act, the defendant alleged that he was in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder by stating that he had no memory under the influence of alcohol at the time of each of the crimes of this case, and thus, according to the records, the defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disorder.