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

The Defendant, at around 09:50 on April 5, 2017, within the Jeju-si management office of C Apartment 2 and 3 complex, and to the victim D (64 tax) who is the managing warden, he/she will commission two computer monitors purchased by the person residing in 307 Dong 204, the above apartment.

The victim's refusal to receive an article without permission due to the reason that the victim was unable to have received the phone, the victim was called "I will start this agenda" and "I will see whether I will start this agenda" to the victim because the victim had a knife and the knife lids of the knife and the knife knife knife, which are dangerous objects in the vehicle, were placed outside the management office, and the management office opened the knife of the knife and the knife knife of the knife in the above knife and the knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife."

At that time, the phrase “Ii. f. Hahhhhhhhhh” was called.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and threatened the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. E statements;

1. 112 A list of reported cases;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to records of seizure, list of seizure and photographs;

1. Relevant Article 284 of the Criminal Act, Articles 283 (1) and 283 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. Protective observation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reasoning for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act became final and conclusive on September 2015, on the grounds that the Defendant was sentenced to two years of suspension of execution on the grounds of interference with business operations around September 2015, etc., on the grounds that there was a dispute over the fact that at the time of the instant crime, at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was under suspension of execution, which had been punished several times due to the crime of injury, interference with business, etc., and the fact that there was a dispute over the receipt