A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On August 30, 2017, around 06:47, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the part of the victimized party, such as the Defendant’s daily behavior and the victim, on the ground that the victim’s horse and dispute were defective while drinking in company with the victim D, the Defendant suffered an injury on the part of the region where the victimized party suffered approximately three weeks of medical treatment.

Accordingly, the defendant injured the victim by an illness, which is a dangerous thing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

1. Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the following grounds for sentencing has been repeated for a favorable reason):

1. Scope of the recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Class 1 (Special Bodily Injury) area (from April to one year) mitigated (including serious efforts to recover damage), the punishment is not imposed (including serious efforts to recover damage), or where considerable damage has been restored to the mitigated area;

(b) Scope of recommendations: Six months to one year (based on the lower limit of the applicable sentencing range in law, since the lower limit of the recommended sentencing range is lower than the lower limit of the applicable sentencing range in law); and

2. The crime of this case by which the sentence of sentence was rendered is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, in light of the method and result of the crime, etc., that the defendant was suffering from an injury or injury, which is an article dangerous to the victim's out-of-the-face suffering from a dispute with the victim, and that the crime is not good.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects it, it is an contingent crime, and that the defendant paid 2.5 million won to the victim by March 20, 2018 during the criminal conciliation process, it seems that he paid 2.5 million won to the victim by March 30, 2018, and the defendant is the defendant.