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

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

On May 26, 2012, at around 23:05, the Defendant 23:05, while drinking alcohol in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government underground 1st century and singing singing in the Defendant against the Defendant, the Defendant left the victim’s face three times at the Defendant’s drinking, shouldered the victim’s right hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand hand over by the Defendant’s care, and left the part of the victim’s head, which is a dangerous object on the table table.

As a result, the defendant injured the victim, such as an open top of a non-permanent cover of treatment days, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing victim photographs;

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. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act ( normal circumstances, such as the confession of and reflect against a crime, the primary crime, and the fact that the victim does not want the punishment by mutual consent with the victim);

1. As to the defense counsel's assertion under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (refinitely considering the above circumstances), the defense counsel at the time of the crime of this case asserts that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder due to the disease of overfinite and uneasiness.

However, the phenomenon where a crime was committed due to the failure to suppress one's impulse is likely to be found even for the normal person. Barring special circumstances, it cannot be said that a person who has such character defect requires an act that cannot be expected to restrain his/her impulse and to demand compliance with the law, barring special circumstances, and thus, it is reasonable to deem that, in principle, the defect such as shock disorder does not constitute a mental disorder, which is the reason for the reduction or exemption of punishment.

According to reference materials submitted by defense counsel, the defendant is physically handicapped.