A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person engaged in construction business, and the victim D (29) and E (30) are F golf course company members.

1. The Defendant, at around 16:30 December 2, 2015, prepared to leave the FF golf course located in Gyeongnam-gun G around 16:30, 2015, 4 only in the victim D D’s 2 Tambling, when intending to go to the fold, such as the 5-cambing, in the Tambling room 2, in which the victim D’s provision is applied. As such, the Defendant changed out of the hamb.

The reason is that golf knife, which is a dangerous thing cited by the defendant, led the victim's body knife knife and salt knife knife and salt knife the left knife in need of treatment of approximately two weeks.

2. The Defendant, at the time and place as referred to in the preceding paragraph, appears to be “dwarf as is bad” to the victim E for the same reason as referred to in the preceding paragraph.

“In the floor of a lush, the left side of the lush, which is a lush and dangerous object once, the head part of the lush with golf bonds, was placed on the left side, the left side of the upper part of the lush, the left side of the upper part of the lush, and the lush of the upper part of the lush- the upper part, which requires treatment for about two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement made to D or E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each injury diagnosis letter;

1. The Defendant’s defense counsel asserts to the effect that this does not constitute “hazardous things” under the pertinent provision of Article 258-2(2) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts.

“When a person commits a crime under Article 257(1) by carrying dangerous articles” under Article 258-2(2) of the Criminal Act refers to the case where a person possesses or carries a dangerous object under the “ intention to use” at the scene of the crime, and does not require that person actually used for the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Do914, Mar. 30, 2007; 2002Do1341, Jun. 14, 2002). According to the evidence mentioned above, golf products used by the defendant for the crime of this case are not required.