A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant was married with the victim D (math, 40 years of age) and married with the victim E (math, 17 years of age).

At around 02:50 on October 10, 2014, the Defendant found the victim's home in the F building of the Daejeon Seosung-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, the victims' home, and found the victim D to have a defect, but the victim did not refuse to do so, walked the victim's parts such as the victim once due to the defect, and was in the victim's cell phone, and was in line with the head of the victim. When the victim was able to collect the head of the victim's head, and the head head was knife by drinking, the Defendant put the victim into the influence of the number of days of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of witness D;

1. A partial statement of D or E;

1. Bodily damaged photo;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (an investigation as to whether an injury medical certificate is submitted);

1. Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution (Consideration, agreement, details of crimes, etc.);

1. The portion of innocence under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. The Defendant, at the time and place indicated in the judgment of the lower court, committed an injury as indicated in its reasoning on the cell phone, which is a “hazardous thing,” left the victim at the victim’s head.

2. Determination of whether a certain object constitutes a “hazardous object” under Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act ought to be based on whether the other party or a third party could feel a risk to life or body when using the object in light of social norms.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do10256, Nov. 11, 2010). However, the shape, weight, material quality (it was installed with rubber material in the mobile phone at the time of the crime’s mobile phone) of the mobile phone as indicated in the record, such as the mobile phone photograph, and the details and method of injury [the victim who continued to live together with the Defendant even after legal divorce (the victim was an employee).