A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On July 8, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for obstruction of performance of official duties by the Seoul Western District Court on October, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 16, 2014, and is currently under suspension of execution.

On October 26, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 11:25, at the main point of “E” operated by the Victim D (A) located in Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul; (b) while drunkly under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant got F with a dangerous free residual, which is a dangerous object, while disputing F with the Defendant’s husband; and (c) faced with the said free residual, the Defendant was faced with the victim’s right side eyebrow, wherein the free residual was left thereafter; and (d) caused the victim’s eyebrow part of the treatment days without the treatment days.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the second protocol of trial;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Photographss of the upper part of the victim and CCTV images;

1. Previous convictions in the judgment: Criminal history records, the previous records, and one copy of the judgment [the defendant and his defense counsel did not have a glass, but have a floor or a blap, and therefore, they cannot be held liable for the relevant crime. However, according to the above CCTV images, etc., it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant had a favorable balance at the time when the defendant got F]; the application of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Statutory mitigation under Articles 10 (2) and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 (see, e.g., the agreement with the victim) of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant is guilty of assault-related criminal records, and it is inevitable to sentence sentence in light of the fact that the criminal records of this case, even though they are currently under the suspension of execution due to their previous convictions, are serving

However, the fact that the victim has agreed with, that it is a crime in the state of mental disorder, and that this judgment is finalized as it is.