A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

Punishment of the crime

1. Around December 5, 2016, at the bus stops located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul) around 20:35 on December 5, 2016, the Defendant sent the attitude of the Defendant, without any reason, to the victim C, who was waiting for the bus, in the food blade (31cm in total length, 18cm in length) that is a dangerous object, with the victim’s face-to-face and was provokingd to inflict harm on the life or body of the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and threatened the victim.

2. Around December 5, 2016, the Defendant took the attitude that the victim E, who returned home on the road of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, seems to have expressed a knife (31cm in total length, 18cm in length) of the knife, which is a dangerous object, to the victim E, without any justifiable reason, would inflict any harm on the victim’s life or body.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and threatened the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement protocol against C and E;

1. Application of the police seizure protocol and photographs thereof to the Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Articles 284 and 283 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. The fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act is to be led to the confession, reflect, and not repeating the crime of this case, is favorable to the defendant. However, the crime of this case was committed by using the food knife, carrying the victim, and the risk was high. The crime of this case was committed against women with low resistance ability, and the method of the crime was brupted, and the crime of this case was committed with considerable mental impulse, and even though the victims were deemed to have received considerable mental impulses, the crime of this case was not taken measures to recover damage was not taken against the defendant. In light of the fact that the crime of this case was committed against the defendant.