beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal records] On December 28, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten months for interference with business affairs by the Seoul Southern District Court, and on June 13, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with labor for interference with business affairs at the Seoul Central District Court and was released on March 30, 2015, and the execution of the sentence was terminated on April 5, 2015.
[2] On April 7, 2016, at around 14:40, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol in “D Public Notice Host” in which he resides in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, he went back to the victim E (42 years of age) who resides in the third floor to avoid the disturbance and then saw it into this tide, and used the victim E (42 years of age) who resides in the third floor, and assault the victim’s left chest part on one occasion, which is a dangerous object into his room (20cm in length).
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. The police statements of the F and E;
1. Relevant photographs;
1. Investigation report (F telephone investigation);
1. Investigation report (E telephone investigation);
1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a written reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, (A) and Acts and subordinate statutes;
1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 261 and 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;
1. As to the claim of aggravated repeated crime Article 35 of the Criminal Act, the defendant and his defense counsel had a mental and physical loss or mental weakness by drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.
Therefore, according to the records, the fact that the defendant was under influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case is acknowledged, but due to that, there was no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.
As such, the above assertion is rejected.
The reason for sentencing is that the defendant's mistake in depth reflects the defendant's mistake and ends his drinking.
In addition, there was no significant damage caused by the crime of this case, and the circumstances that agreed with the victim would be recognized.
However, under the influence of alcohol.