A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, around March 26, 2018, up to 07:35 on March 26, 2018, in front of the Daejeon Seo-gu Daejeon apartment D, which is a residence of the victim B (54 tax) (54), injects the toxic gas into his house.

I think that the defendant's office is dangerous articles (such as Dol, 30cm in length) Ga with Doldol and Doldol and Doldol, and whether the defendant's office "injecting the Dol and Doldol" with Dol and Doldol and Dol and Dol

personal death.

“In the end, the victim threatened the victim.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. B written statements;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Relevant Article 284 of the Criminal Act, Articles 283 (1) and 283 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection;

1. The judgment of the defendant and his defense counsel on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act and the defendant and his defense counsel did not mean that they were blick credit and that they would die. The defendant's act constitutes a legitimate defense or was in a state of mental or physical loss.

Therefore, according to the evidence revealed in the records of this case, the victim's investigative agency and legal statement are consistent and concrete, and it is believed that the defendant lost the victim's ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime, or lacks the ability to do so, and there is no reason to view the defendant's and the defense counsel's assertion is not acceptable.

The reason for sentencing is that the crime of this case threatens the occupant of apartment with the view of the defendant, and it is not good that the form of the crime is dangerous.

However, the sentence is based on the fact that there is no criminal history, the fact that the mental therapy is required due to damage, etc., and the sentencing conditions shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, etc.