A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

(e).

Punishment of the crime

On January 28, 2018, around 22:10, the Defendant paid taxi charges twice to the Victim F (58 tax) who is a taxi driver, while sitting in the back of the taxi parked in front of the E-art club located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, and was seated in the back of the taxi.

The driver tried to wear the right shoulder of the victim who is seated in the driver's seat with the driver's seat, to take the face part of the victim, to take the victim's face, and to take the victim's face with the left hand, and assault the victim by getting the head of the driver's seat on several occasions, as the victim flicks with the victim's face.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the law of the police statement protocol to F;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. There is a record of being punished as an act of violence for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act in the suspended sentence, the age, sex, intelligence and environment of the defendant, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be determined as the same as the order;

Rejection of Public Prosecution

1. On January 28, 2018, the Defendant, around 22:15, 2018, tried to enter a club or club in front of the E-Age club located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul. However, a person under the influence of alcohol from the victim C (tax 42) was unable to enter the facility, and the victim was assaulted at one time by drinking to the face of the victim.

2. This part of the facts charged is an offense falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.

In that sense, according to the written application for non-prosecution of punishment submitted to this court on July 17, 2018, it is apparent that the victim expressed his/her wish not to punish the defendant. Thus, this part of the prosecution is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.