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

1. On July 11, 2015, the Defendant damaged property: (a) No. 3 times the “E amusement shop” operated by the victim D in Sacheon-si, Sacheon-si; and (b) during the business hours, an employee had been employed while drinking alcohol.

The victim's market value on the table is 40,000 won or more, which is the victim's possession on the table due to corrosion, has been broken up by 8 beer mack and 12 macking the floor in his hand.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the victim's property.

2. On July 11, 2015, around 04:05, the Defendant: (a) at the “E amusement shop” parking lot; (b) as seen above, the Victim F (47 years old) who is an employee of the main shop, caused the Defendant to take the Defendant into the outside of the main shop the victim’s face at one time.

As a result, the defendant put the victim into the right side of the mouth, which requires treatment for about two weeks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Investigation report (the result of ctv video analysis), investigation report (the report accompanied by the video);

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

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines for a 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 defendant alleged that he did not assault the victim at the time of his assertion, and he used family affairs to assault the victim;

This constitutes a legitimate defense due to passive resistance, and the victim suffered "injury".

No assessment may be made.

2. However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged in full view of each of the evidence in the judgment, are the roads consistently from the entrance of the victim to the date of this Court from the investigative agency to the date of this Court.