A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On July 1, 2017, at the front of D main points located in Kimcheon-si C around 23:50 on July 1, 2017, on the ground that the Defendant did not pay the money between E and E, the Defendant would die with the victim F (57 cm) of E, a dangerous object in the vicinity of the horse (15 cm in diameter).

"Audition" and the victim had been affected by the victim, and the flab caused the victim to fall off to the flab of the victim.

As a result, the Defendant inflicted the injury on the victim in terms of the upper part of the upper part of the 1st part of the right, which requires approximately four weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness F and E;

1. A report on internal investigation and a report on internal investigation (in relation to the situation of dispatch to the scene, the stone which is a dangerous object used in the course of violence);

1. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the medical certificate of injury (the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant can be found to have inflicted an injury on the victim as stated in its judgment and inflicted an injury on the victim.

(1) The victim F was a victim from an investigative agency to the court of law.

At the time of the purport that “” is a specific and consistent statement.

② Although E also testified to the effect that the Defendant was sleeped with the victim, the investigative agency made a statement that corresponds to the above statement of the victim.

③ At the time of the instant case, the Defendant also recognized the fact that he was able to gather stones.

④ On the other hand, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the victim gets off the Defendant’s shoulder and did not see the victim’s seat.

However, the victim did not know the defendant at all before the occurrence of the instant case as a person with a relative relationship with the defendant, and it seems that the victim was aware of the monetary relationship between the defendant and the E in the instant case. This is the same.