If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On May 25, 2013, at around 14:13, the Defendant, “D Hanwon” operated by the Defendant in Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, caused the injury to the Victim E, such as spaw, 72 years of age, F (n, 52 years of age), in opposition to the assault of the Victim E (F), spacing the fat of the Victim E, walking one time in spacing, displaying a drinking, cutting the body with a hand, cutting the head of the Victim F in hand, knifing the head of the head of the f, and making the head a drinking, thereby causing approximately two weeks of injury to the Victim E, and spacing, etc., requiring approximately two weeks of treatment to the Victim F, respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and E;

1. Each injury diagnosis letter;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes on video CDs (CCTV);

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime and the choice of punishment. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion of litigation costs under the main text of Article 186 (1) and Article 191 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserted that the defendant's act of assaulting the victims, such as the facts charged in this case, was inevitably issued in the course of passive defense to prevent the victims from assaulting the defendant first, and thus, the defendant's act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act, and thus, the illegality is excluded.

However, according to the evidence examined above, it is hard to view that the defendant's act constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act under the Criminal Act in light of all circumstances, such as the background, process, purpose and means of the case at the time, degree of assault, etc.

Therefore, the above argument is without merit.