A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

On January 6, 2015, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million at the Seoul Central District Court as an assault; on March 19, 2015, a summary order of KRW 500,000 as an assault; on October 22, 2015, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million as an assault; and on October 22, 2015, the same court received a summary order of KRW 1 million as an assault, etc., on three occasions.

On January 24, 2018, the Defendant: (a) 20:20 on January 24, 2018, on the ground that the Defendant drinking alcohol at a “D” restaurant located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul Metropolitan Government, and went through a dispute with drinking, and (b) caused the illness, which is a dangerous object on the table table, to go off to the victim E (34 ).

In this respect, the defendant carried a dangerous object, and assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Partial statement of the witness F;

1. E written statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as reports on the occurrence of violence, site photographs of damage, criminal history, etc. (A), investigation reports (prior convictions and confirmations of the same type);

1. Articles 261 and 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime concerned;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Determination as to the defendant's assertion under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Social Service Order

1. The defendant asserts that while disputing F with F, the fact that he/she was killed in the front wall of him/her by the display of his/her claim against F, he/she did not contain any fact that he/she was suffering from an illness towards E.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of each of the above evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, the following circumstances can be acknowledged.

1) From the investigation date by the investigative agency to this court, the victim E was faced with the Defendant’s head, faced with the latter’s wall, and was frighted to the victim’s walk, and was frightd with the sound to be frightd with the Defendant’s head.

A consistent statement is consistently made.

A damaged person is disadvantageous to the defendant.