A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Punishment of the crime

At around 02:40 on March 28, 2013, the Defendant suffered an injury, such as an unfashioning, etc., for about three weeks in need of medical treatment, when he/she received a demand from the victim E (nive, 29 years of age) and he/she was in dispute with the victim E (nive, 29 years of age) in Ansan-si, the Defendant was in the victim's face, and he/she was in the electric stove, which was a dangerous object that he/she was going to go through, and was in the victim's face.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of witness E;

1. A protocol of examination of part of the defendant by prosecution;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A written diagnosis of injury (Evidence No. 45 pages);

1. Photographs related to the case;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (where evidence is recorded nine pages);

1. Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of inflicting an injury on a dangerous object);

1. As to the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation, the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that there was no fact that the Defendant had electric stoves toward the victim’s face, and that there was no intention on the part of the victim in light of the victim’s face while protruding back.

In full view of the above evidence, the victim stated that at the time of the police statement that the defendant had an electric stoves toward the victim's face, the defendant made a statement to the victim that he had an electric stoves toward the floor and asked the victim to make a statement. The court of this case stated that the defendant requested the victim to make a statement according to the victim's statement. At the time of this case, since the distance between the defendant and the victim was very high at the time of this case, the distance between the defendant and the victim was very high at the time of the defendant's statement, so it would be likely that the victim might immediately compromise with the victim because the head and body of the victim would interfere with the victim's face, and the defendant was electrical stove.