Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

On December 21, 2015, the Defendant used the c restaurant located in Kimcheon-si B, Kimcheon-si, and used the flapsing of the victim D (56 tax) in the flapsing of this Defendant, and used the flapsing of the victim on several occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of each police station against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to E and D;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order [the injured person at the time of the instant case who drinks together with his/her daily behaviors, including the defendant, before entering a restaurant;

According to the E’s police statement, the victim expressed the victim to E, and the victim expressed the victim to the victim. For this reason, the defendant and the victim argued that the defendant and the victim were able to live in bridges with each other, and when the defendant and the victim were in the restaurant, the victim could live outside the restaurant of the horse.

The statement made by the defendant and the victim is different from the other party's bat, but it is consistent in that the defendant and the victim had batd one another and fighting one another's body.

In light of the above circumstances, it is reasonable to view the Defendant’s act as an attack as an active attack beyond the passive limit of defense, and thus, it does not constitute a legitimate defense.