A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Punishment of the crime

On September 18, 2011, the Defendant: (a) around 00:05 on September 18, 201, on the ground that the victim C(the age of 47) was in opposition to the new 345-7 ETNT (L) dormitory in Pyeongtaek-si, Pyeongtaek-si, and (b) took one time away from the victim’s right eye, which is a dangerous object, and met the victim’s body and body.

As a result, the defendant suffered from the victim about four weeks of medical treatment, and caused the victim to suffer from the injury.

Summary of Evidence

1. A witness D or C's legal statement;

1. Protocol concerning suspect interrogation of C;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of each statute on photographs of damage;

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination on the assertion of the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation

1. The alleged defendant and his defense counsel stated that although they have been wraped with the victim C, there was no time for the victim to go to the hospital due to the disease, the victim did not speak that he was faced with the disease due to the treatment at the hospital, and even if he was drinking rather than the disease due to the disease, the injury like the injury of the victim may occur even if he was suffering from the injury of the victim. Thus, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be acknowledged that the defendant was caused by the disease.

2. According to the evidence of the judgment, the following facts can be acknowledged: ① the victim and D consistently stated that the defendant was able to keep the victim as a main soldier; ② the police officer taken the victim at the time when the defendant and the victim were walked-in disease; ② there is a photographic picture of the police officer dispatched at the time when the defendant and the victim were wald-in disease, and the witness D has long been present in this court while the defendant was unable to keep his memory, but the defendant was walked with the victim as a main soldier, and stated that the victim was walked-in disease, and that the victim was wald-in, and the victim was s