2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 16093, Jan. 1,

On December 13, 2014, around 07:50 on December 13, 2014, the Defendant found that the victim D (the 32 years of age) had been engaged in the construction work at the above 1006 floor, the Defendant’s residence, such as other club fee, and caused the injury to the victim, on the ground that the victim was able to know and satisfe at the above other club fee, and the victim was satisfed, and the victim was able to flick and sat down the breath, which requires treatment for about 21 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Witnesses D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion regarding the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act alleged that the defendant and his/her defense counsel did not go beyond the victim as stated in its reasoning, and even if a family contact occurred, it constitutes a legitimate act as a legitimate act as a self-defense or passive resistance to defend harm to his/her body. However, in light of the circumstances and the attitude of the crime as stated in its reasoning, it is difficult to view the defendant's act as a legitimate act that does not go against self-defense or social