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

1. On July 1, 2015, the injured Defendant: (a) on July 1, 2015, 07:30, on the part of the Defendant: (b) on the part of the Defendant’s first working at the Kitter of the Kitter apartment C apartment site, the Defendant saw that the Defendant was fluor D with other women, “I would like to fluor any management expenses at low expense; and (c) as at now, I would like to fluorize with the victim E, fluor, and the victim, while taking a brush, and brupted with the victim, caused the victim to brupted brupted brut that requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

2. From among the above dates, places, and apartment residents, the Defendant took a bath to the victim with a large amount of 30 minutes, “Abrupted chron, pigs such as chron, bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch bitch, emine, fluor, and franch gue,” which is “Abrupted by the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant openly insultingd the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and D;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written confirmation of each fact of D and F;

1. Each investigation report (person G telephone conversations with him/her), and (F telephone conversations with a witness);

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of injury), Article 311 of the Criminal Act (the point of insult), and the selection of each fine;

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument does not mean that the Defendant did not inflict any injury on the victim. However, even though there was a dispute with the victim by somewhat somewhat following expressions, the illegality of the assertion constitutes a justifiable act that does not constitute an insulting speech in light of the contents and circumstances of the expression, etc., or that is not contrary to social rules, even if not, constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate social rules.

2. As to the point of injury first, the victim E is from the police.