A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who had been accommodated in the “Catur” located in the pipeline hole B at the Government of his own city.

At around 20:30 on June 13, 2015, the Defendant: (a) called “the Defendant’s vehicle is deducted from the Defendant’s vehicle within the apartment lot” via phone from the victim E, who was the denied of D’s operation; (b) went back to the her mother and drinking the her car glass from the her mother; and (c) was able to avoid disturbance by stating “I am, Crop dys, Lys, Lys, Lys, Lys, Lys, Lys, Lys,” and (d) was unable to avoid disturbance; (b) the victim’s inside part of the cel parking lot was sold to the her for drinking part; and (c) the victim was faced with the cel’s injury, such as fying, requiring approximately two weeks of medical treatment; and (d) the victim’s injury was caused by the victim’s injury of e-mail, such as the price for 2 week treatment of e-mail.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

1. The investigation report (victim 1) D, Victim 2) E (the submission of an injury diagnosis report);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to victim photographs (D, E) of the site;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is the fact that the defendant had been punished several times as an act of violence but again committed the instant crime, and the degree of injury suffered by the victims is not less severe. However, it is reasonable to strictly punish the defendant in light of the fact that the defendant is recognized as a whole, and the fact that the victims do not want the punishment by mutual consent with the victims after the closing of argument in the instant case is considered as favorable to the defendant. The circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the age of the defendant, personality and conduct, and family environment, etc. are considered as follows.