A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. At around 01:50 on August 18, 2013, the Defendant: (a) expressed that the victim C (the 67-year-old) of the frontway in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government was able to take a bath for the victim, who was frighted from the taxi fee, to return the taxi fee to the victim; (b) the victim was able to take a eye of the victim’s left side part of the snow part of the victim’s drinking once, and (c) twice the part of the injection, the victim was able to take two-time medical treatment.

2. The Defendant damaged the property by putting his mobile phone on the studio set up in the taxi at the time and at the place of the preceding paragraph, and making his cell phone fall short of the market price of 30,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. Each photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury), Article 366 of the Criminal Act (the point of damage and destruction of property), the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The sentencing guidelines are applied to the crimes of bodily injury among the above crimes on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as "the favorable circumstances of sentencing"), and the sentencing guidelines are applied to the crimes of bodily injury among the above crimes, and the sentencing guidelines are applied to the mitigated area (in addition, April through January 6) among the types of Type 1 (General Injury), and the sentencing should be determined for not less than 4 months in consideration of the lower limit. Although the defendant had served as 10 times punishment for the same crimes, and again committed the crimes of this case, even if he had served as 10 times punishment for the same crimes, it is not good that the crime of this case is committed again. However, the fact that the defendant committed the crime at the time of the crime and commits mistake, the degree of damage seems to have been caused by the crime of this case, and the degree of damage is not relatively heavy, and the victim is not subject to punishment by agreement with the victim, and it is determined like the order of sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act