A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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.

Punishment of the crime

On September 3, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 03:53 on September 3, 2016, the victim D (31) of the victim D (31) in the 3th floor of the G dormitory, among the disputes arising from the 197-type dispute, the Defendant: (b) prevented the victim from conditioning as if the victim frighted the Defendant’s neck; and (c) caused a hack pipe (100cm in length) which is a dangerous object that has been abandoned in the company air base near the place; (d) continuously 2:3 times the victim’s head, and sustained the victim’s face with about 2:3 times the victim’s head, and sustained the victim’s face with about 2:3 times the victim’s head, and sustained the victim with about 20 days of the need for medical treatment, and sustained the victim’s opening the wall.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (Attachment, etc. of a medical certificate);

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for Reduction of Quantity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the recognition of and rebuttal against his/her misconduct, the adoption of the agreement with the

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical weakness under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution (recognition of the aforementioned grounds for mitigation), the Defendant alleged that he was in a state of mental and physical weakness under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and the record reveals that the Defendant was in a state of drinking at the time of committing the instant crime. However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s reputation, character and behavior, motive and background of the instant crime, means and method of committing the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime was committed; (c) the Defendant’s speech and behavior from the investigative agency to this court; and (d) the Defendant made a relatively small memory of the circumstances at the time of committing the instant crime, it is not deemed that the Defendant had a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's above assertion.

(b) for more than one year.