A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On June 19, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and two months of imprisonment with prison labor by the Seoul Northern District Court for the crime of injury, etc., and on March 17, 2015, in addition to the completion of the execution of the sentence in the Ansan Prison on March 17, 2015, the Defendant has more criminal records such as six times of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and five times of injury.

Criminal facts

On June 14, 2015, at around 00:20, the Defendant: (a) around the street room of “D” located in C, Jung-gu, Seoul; (b) caused disturbance to the victim E (49 years old) and six persons, other than the victim E (49 years old) who drinked in the outside tables; and (c) reported the Defendant out of the outside; and (d) caused beer diseases in the surrounding areas of the misunderstanding that he she frighted to the face of the victim; and (b) caused the victim to undergo approximately three weeks of treatment; and (c) caused the victim to play a heat in the mouth.

Accordingly, the defendant habitually injured the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Witness F;

1. Statement made by the prosecution against E;

1. A photograph of damage and a written diagnosis;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Habituality of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes recognizing dampness in light of the records of each crime, the frequency of crimes, and the fact that the same kind of crime has been repeated several times;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act, Articles 264 and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. Determination on the assertion of the Defendant and defense counsel under Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes

1. The gist of the argument is that the defendant is free from the victim

There is no fact that he was a shotist only, but there was a be a beer disease.

2. The following circumstances revealed by each evidence of the judgment, i.e., the victim under investigation by an investigative agency, and consistently followed the Defendant’s disease.

The statements are consistently made in the main part of the statement, and the witness F's statement is also consistent with the victim's statement and credibility in the victim's statement in light of the victim's upper part and the victim's upper part.

The possibility that the above wife has occurred due to shotists.