A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that 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 October 12, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 07:00, at the Defendant’s residence located in Daejeon Seo-gu C and 101, and (b) at the husband’s place of residence, and (c) when the husband, the husband, and the husband, demanded divorce, and (d) the Defendant tried to do so with a knife in the kitchen while living in the kitchen while the kitchen, and (e) tried to do so, by taking the knife the knife, and by taking the knife off the knife, the husband was able to do so, and then put the knife by using the knife.

As a result, the defendant tried to extinguish the above structure used as a residence by 3 persons such as her husband and her child, but the her husband who found it did not have the intention to extinguish a fire caused by the her husband, but did not commit an attempted crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination of suspect suspect regarding D by the prosecution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 174 and 164 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

2. Mitigation of attempted crimes under Articles 25 (2) and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

3. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

4. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (the following grounds for sentencing), which are advantageous to the reasons for suspended sentence.

1. The crimes of this case subject to the sentencing criteria shall not be subject to the sentencing criteria.

2. The Defendant, who was sentenced to a sentence, was locked by the husband and the 7-year-old her husband who was locked, covered by this fluor, and added a fluor. If the fluor was not fluored, the Defendant could cause serious damage to the life, body, etc. of the family, and thus, the fluority of the offense is not good.

However, there is no criminal history against the defendant, and the defendant is contingent. D does not want the punishment of the defendant, D appears to have committed the crime of this case as the crime of this case was attempted, and it seems that there is no actual loss of human life and property damage.