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.

Punishment of the crime

At around 23:00 on December 11, 2012, the Defendant discussed whether or not the Defendant would pay the drinking value to the victim D (the age of 35) while drinking alcohol together with the victim D. B, the head part of the victim was 4 times by beer disease, which is a dangerous object on the table, and the victim’s head was cut off to defend this. To defend this, the Defendant her left part was cut to the victim’s left part due to a shock, which is a dangerous object, even though the victim prevented head with his left part, and caused the victim to tear the left part of the victim’s loss. After that, the Defendant got the victim beyond the floor to walk twice the part of the victim’s shoulder and sacrife two weeks of the victim’s shoulder, walking the part of the victim’s shoulder and sacrine, alute and alute, which requires two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to on-site and victim image pictures, death diagnosis reports, and investigation reports (report on telephone conversations of a victim);

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence is the case where the defendant, who was dissatisfied with the victim due to the payment of the ex officio value, inflicted an injury on the victim by breaking the beer, which is a dangerous object, and the risk of the method of crime and the degree of damage resulting therefrom, are very poor.

However, it appears that the defendant led to the crime of this case and committed the crime of this case by contingently during the commission of the crime of this case. However, considering the fact that the victim did not punish the defendant, and the degree of harm is insignificant even though it is satisfly agreed with the victim, it is necessary to reduce the statutory punishment by discretionary mitigation, and at the same time to suspend the execution of the sentence.