A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

On September 24, 2009, the Defendant sentenced four months to imprisonment for habitual fraud at the Gwangju District Court on September 24, 2009, and completed the execution of the sentence in the Gwangju Prison on December 21, 2009.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On September 14, 2011, the Defendant: (a) 03:15 on September 14, 201, 201, the Defendant drinking alcohol at “Ejuk” operated by the victim D (Woo, 60 years of age) in Seopopo City C on the ground that the victim does not take a child’s clock; (b) boomed the victim’s buck with the hand floor on three occasions; and (c) assaulted the victim by taking one time the chest part of the victim’s chest part going beyond the boom.

2. The Defendant violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective action, deadly weapons, etc.) brought about the part of the sick part of the sick part of the beer’s disease remaining after having been kept in the place at the time and place specified in paragraph (1), and threatened the victim as if he were to turn up against the shoulder.

Accordingly, the defendant used a beer disease, which is a dangerous object, to threaten the victim.

3. On September 14, 201, the Defendant was arrested by G and police officers from the Seogpo Police Station F District Unit of the Seocho-gu Police Station, who was called up after receiving a report from the said “E”). On September 14, 201, the Defendant was arrested as a rioter and a flagrant offender.

The Defendant: (a) the police officer attempted to take a defective bath to arrest himself as a flagrant offender; (b) the G was prevented from having called out, and obstructed the lawful performance of official duties concerning the maintenance of police officers’ order and investigation duties, such as assaulting twice the face part of the above G on the right blue part of the blue with the arms.

around 00:00 on May 21, 2013, the Defendant issued an order of alcohol and alcohol as if he would pay the victim a normal drinking value, etc. from the point of view of the operation of the victim J in Seopopopo City of Seopopo City of Seopopopo City of 0:00.

However, the fact did not have the intention or ability to pay the price even if the victim received the alcohol and the communication from the victim.

The Defendant is identical to this.