2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On June 15, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 300,00,00 for the following facts constituting the following facts: “Around 23:40 of the Plaintiff’s husband and wife and the Defendant’s husband and wife, while drinking together at the Plaintiff’s home, the Defendant assaulted the Plaintiff’s head on one occasion on the ground that the Defendant was her spouse’s sexual conflict with his/her spouse C, and the Plaintiff was injured by his/her head on one hand.”

B. However, the original criminal case filed a complaint with the purport that the Plaintiff “the Defendant committed 4-5 violence against the Plaintiff’s head part of the Plaintiff’s elbow and brought an injury requiring two-day medical treatment due to the brain-dead in the open two parts.” However, the said court found the Defendant guilty only for the above assault, and acquitted the Defendant on the ground of the above injury.

C. The Prosecutor appealed as Suwon District Court 2018No8328, but the above court dismissed the Prosecutor’s appeal on the following grounds, and the above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

① In light of the following circumstances and the internal investigation report prepared by the police, it seems that the statement by the Plaintiff was not to be made to the police officer who was dispatched to the Plaintiff upon receiving the report to the effect that the Defendant prices his head on his blue blue. On the same day, the statement prepared by the Plaintiff does not contain any such content; the Defendant’s statement in the investigative agency and the court concerning the method and frequency of pricing the Plaintiff is inconsistent; the Plaintiff’s statement on the circumstances at the time of damage is not consistent; the Plaintiff’s statement on the damaged photograph submitted by the Plaintiff is only able to confirm only the fact that the Plaintiff’s arms and bridges were involved; it is difficult to believe that the Plaintiff’s statement on the circumstances at the time of damage does not coincide with D (the Plaintiff’s spouse); and the Plaintiff was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case.