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 November 15, 2015, the Defendant was boarding a victim B (53 tax) from the long distance of the old Ho-gu Ho-gu Ho-gu Ho-gu Hoon on November 15, 2015 to C-si that is driven by the Defendant.

The defendant 22:30 on the same day, while under the influence of alcohol on the underground streets of the old-gu criminal map during the Anyang-si, the defendant gets off the knife knife (16 cm in total, 2 cm in length on the day) which is a dangerous object without any justifiable reason, and "Chewing knife, dead, and discarded."

“The term “assumed and threatened”.

Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim who is a taxi driver in operation with dangerous things.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against B;

1. Application of statutes on records of seizure and lists of seizure;

1. Article 5-10 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes committed against the relevant crime, and Articles 284 and 283 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for the ordinary concurrent crimes (a punishment imposed on any violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes with heavier punishment) ;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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

1. An order to attend a course under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Act, the Defendant asserts to the effect that he was in a state of mental and physical weakness that he had no memory under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of this case, it is recognized that the defendant has diced a little amount of alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but it does not seem that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

Reasons for sentencing

1. The application of the sentencing criteria does not apply to this case because the sentencing criteria do not present a separate processing criteria for the ordinary concurrent crimes. 2. The circumstances and this case below the sentencing criteria.