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

Punishment of the crime

At around 19:30 on September 18, 2012, the Defendant, at the main point of “D” located in Gunsan City C, has a dispute over the victim E (year 42) and female problem.

For reasons of the occurrence of a fire, two small-scale disease, which is a dangerous object being placed in the table, was sprinked by putting two small-scale disease in two hands, so that they can protruding to the face of the victim, and the victim's fighting with the victim, while fighting with the victim, knife at one time the knife, so that approximately three weeks of treatment is required to the victim, and the knife and the knife of the knife.

(A) The gist of the evidence is that the prosecutor is guilty of facts constituting a crime in the judgment, and the prosecutor is not guilty on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize it and there is no other evidence to prove it.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Photographs;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. A photo of the damaged part;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes of inquiry report (in 62 pages of investigation records);

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's argument under Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is changed to the purport that "When the defendant faced with the first main illness, he was faced with the victim's face, he was faced with the victim's face, he was pushed away from the victim's face, and the victim's face was pushed down by being pushed down, and the victim's face was knicked in his hand while going beyond the time."

In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence mentioned above, i.e., ① the victim from the investigative agency to this court, consistently stated to the effect that “the defendant was faced with the soldiers who were faced with the two descendants, and immediately reached the knife”, and then, the victim made a consistent statement to the effect that knife.