Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant and the victim B (the 33 years of age) are married couple.

On December 20, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 02:35, at the home of the Defendant of Michuhol-gu, Michuhol-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City Clle D, the Defendant: (b) carried the victim’s disease at home; (c) shouldered the main disease at home; and (d) carried the main disease at one hand, which is a dangerous object; and (d) threatened the victim with a dangerous object.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. Requests for cooperation in investigation and reply;

1. Investigation report (referring to the case in which the fire fighting department in the natural south and the emergency medical service area is performed);

1. Application of the statutes governing photographs submitted by the victim;

1. Relevant Article 284 of the Criminal Act and Articles 283 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning the crime;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The crime is highly dangerous in light of the circumstances leading up to, or the attitude of, the crime by which the spouse seems to have been threatened, by taking a attitude that seems to undermine the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and if the spouse does not comply with the demand, etc., it appears that it would cause harm and injury.

In the course of committing the crime of this case, the victim is arrested the defendant.

He was faced with fingers, salute, salute, leg, etc. by a shouldered salute's disease.

However, the following are the circumstances that are favorable to the defendant: (a) the defendant was committed while committing a crime; (b) the defendant was not trying to directly harm the body of the victim by using dangerous articles; (c) the victim was in progress with divorce procedures; and (d) victim protection orders such as prohibition of access are not likely to repeat the crime against the same victim; (d) the victim was fully agreed with the victim during the trial of this case; and (e) there was no force to punish more than violence and fine.

In addition to the above circumstances, all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case shall be considered as ordered.