A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

around 13:45 on May 16, 2016, the Defendant sought to discuss the divorce issue with the spouse F with the 1st head E of the Dong apartment 1, Dong 206 at Singu, Singu, Singu, Do. However, E had not been the other party to the case and had been able to look at the house.

After having contacted E by telephone, the Defendant: (a) stored a bruma cremation paper on the floor of the living room; and (b) laid a bruter. However, upon receiving the above contact, the Defendant did not go to an attempted attempt by E and security guards, who immediately returned home on the top of water.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. The police seizure record and the list of seizure;

1. All on-site photographs;

1. Application of the existing Acts and subordinate statutes under subparagraph 1 of this Article;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 174 and 164 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. Article 25 (2) and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of attempted crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( considered favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing to be considered in the future); and

1. Probation under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of punishment: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year and not more than six months but not more than 15 years;

2. The sentencing guidelines do not apply. 3. The crime of this case, which was sentenced, was committed by the defendant in the apartment house of the mother, and was committed by the defendant, and was committed by attempted death or serious property damage.

In light of such risk, the criminal liability of the defendant is not against the defendant.

However, since the crime of this case was attempted, there was no special loss of human life or property damage.

The defendant appears to have committed the crime of this case in a contingent manner, and the defendant has no same criminal records.

As the defendant is led to confession and reflect, the victim does not distort this mistake.

This shall be considered in the circumstances favorable to the defendant.