A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On June 23, 2015, at around 16:50, the Defendant: (a) coming from the front line of the Chungcheongbuk-si, the victim F (47 years old) from the Chinese Ma-dong E, while coming from the taxi driven by the victim F (47 years old); (b) coming from the said taxi due to the fact that there was a defect in the said taxi; (c) one kitchen blade (30cm in total length, about 18cm in length) which is an object dangerous in the Defendant’s house located adjacent to the Defendant’s house after being contacted by the phone, and she gets off the kitchen knife in the front line, and then the victim knife the said kitchen knife.

In addition, "A, B" was read as "A, B, and B," with the victim's clothes as they were bruted.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and threatened the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Before and at the same place as the defendant's judgment in the first public trial records, the kitchen blade shall be taken out;

statement to the effect that “A” was read as “A” with smuggling to the victim;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. A kitchen report (a kitchen blades used by the principal, A4, etc.), and photographs related to the case;

1. The CD of each CCTV video material CD (the defendant and his defense counsel did not say that the victim "a, the kitchen knife," while being sealed with the victim as in the time and place stated in the defendant's judgment, as the kitchen knife, as in the facts charged: Provided, That the victim and the defense counsel used the kitchen

E argues that knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif

However, consistently from the police to this court, the victim F stated to the effect that “The victim F stated that “as stated in the facts of the crime in the Defendant’s judgment, the kitchen knife the kitchen knicker’s clothes towards the victim’s clothes,” and that “the victim’s knife’s attitude is strong,” and that there was no motive to make a false statement in order to mislead the Defendant in the situation where the victim agreed with the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the fact that he threatened the victim with the kitchen knife at the first trial date, and reversed his statement.