A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

And the victims C(Nam, 31) are those members of E collaborative companies F of E collaborative companies in each city D, who are working in the workplace.

At around 20:40 on September 30, 2013, the Defendant, along with the victim and five employees, performed alcoholic beverages at a 'H’ restaurant located in G at a macroscam on September 30, 2013, on the part of the victim’s head on the ground that the victim’s horse was defective to the effect that “the victim scambling with the victim’s and five employees, would fall short of the Defendant’s work experience, but would be better than the Defendant’s work.” The Defendant left twice the part of the victim’s head (360 ml.).

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and carried them with brain ties, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Related photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing hospitalization;

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., that the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual consent with the victim, and that the damage to the victim is relatively minor);

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

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. of Social Service Orders;