A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant and the victim B(the age of 42) are between the two, and the victim B and the victim C(the age of 37) are between the couple.

On May 18, 2019, the Defendant, within 00:40 on May 18, 2019, within 00:40, the D Apartment E, and the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant was aware of the horses, caused the Victim B’s horse, and caused the beer’s disease, which is a dangerous object on the table table, one time the head part of the Victim B, and continued to prevent the Defendant from getting out of the said beer C.

As a result, the Defendant carried dangerous things and carried them for about two weeks to the injured party B, and each victim C committed an inception for the suspension of the treatment days to the injured party C.

Summary of Evidence

1. A written statement by the police concerning the witness B and C’s respective legal statements C;

1. Investigative report (the results reported by DNA detected on the surface of a criminal impulse), genetic appraisal report (the submission of a medical certificate by victims), and medical certificate;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure;

1. 112 reported case handling table;

1. Application of damaged photographs and on-site photographs statutes;

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

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order [the prosecutor shall request the confiscation of a seized beer (the confiscation of a certificate subparagraph 1)];

However, according to the records, such as the records of seizure and the list of seizure, the above beer's disease was voluntarily received from the victims, not the defendant, and seized by the victims. In full view of the fact that the victims were submitted from the victim C on the premise that they were joint owners of the above beer's disease, and there is no evidence that the victims renounced their ownership, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone does not fall under the ownership of a person other than the criminal.