A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

Punishment of the crime

On May 15, 2019, at around 00:20, the Defendant thought that D(54 years of age and remaining) a person related to de facto marriage is working with female employees at a 'C' restaurant located in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and caused injury to the victim by raising the victim's face over the floor and exposing the victim's face at least five times by moving the victim's click with her hand, and raising the victim's face part at two times, which is a dangerous object that was next to it, after gathering about five weeks of her head, and requiring approximately two weeks of treatment.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and inflicted an injury on the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of D, E, and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of Part IV of a medical certificate, a copy of medical records, and a death diagnosis certificate;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 186 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act to bear litigation costs;

1. The scope of punishment by law: One to ten years of imprisonment;

2. The scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of types] the scope of the recommended punishment [the scope of punishment] according to the sentencing guidelines, which includes no special injury, repeated crime [the category 1] and no special injury [the scope of the recommended punishment] [the scope of the recommended punishment], six months to two years [ the scope of the recommended punishment modified according to the applicable sentencing], one year to two years (the lowest limit of the sentencing range recommended in the sentencing guidelines is set according to the law applicable sentencing standards, because the lowest limit of the sentencing range recommended in the sentencing guidelines is inconsistent with the statutory applicable applicable sentences).

3. On December 16, 2016 and February 20, 2017, the victim of the sentence was under operation of cerebral chrony, and it seems that the defendant in a de facto marital relationship with the victim was fully aware of the fact.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not make efforts to recover damage by denying his/her criminal act even though the degree of damage was suffered by a very dangerous method, and even though the degree of damage was not somewhat weak.

On the other hand, however,