Where the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

1. Around 13:40 on December 24, 2016, the Defendant assaulted the victim C with a knife that the Victim C (22 years of age)’s father F borrowed money in front of the E gas station office located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, the Victim C (22 years of age), who was unable to repay the borrowed money, was the victim’s knife who was the father of the Victim C (22 years of age), and who was the victim’s knife who was the victim of the same offense, was the victim’s knife by having the victim’s knife.

2. The Defendant’s assault against the Victim G does not see the victim G (43 tax) in the date and time and place described in the above paragraph 1, whether the victim G (43 tax) cannot do so in the remaining business chapter;

(b) Liquor tax summary.

“F department(H division) is written in the indictment, but it appears to be a clerical error in the indictment, although the indictment is written as “H division” to the victim.

evidence records 37 pages 37, the Defendant entered into a false rental agreement with G

B. L. L. L. L. L. L. L. L.C.;

(c) have been aware of its substance;

See the statement that it was said that two have been aware that the two have been engaged in fake business.

Accordingly, the victim "I am aware that I am, I am immediately," and expressed the desire to "I am," and assaulted the victim's chest by the defendant's hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness C, G, and I;

1. Part of the witness J’s legal statement;

1. Data of photographs;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on report of occurrence and internal investigation;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the same Act (a point of violence) and the selection of each fine for the crime;

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 Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant did not have made a fry against the victim C, and that he had his father or father who caused the bomb to the same crime. The victim C's flag was not feased once by the inspection of his hand.

The defendant is a citizen of the victim G's chest.