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

Some of the facts charged were revised to the extent that it does not impede the defendant's exercise of defense.

The Defendant is the wife of the candidate C of the head of the “B redevelopment project partnership” partnership, and the victim D (the age of 65) has been monitoring illegal written resolution against redevelopment. On March 6, 2019, around 19:00, when he received a right to park from the proprietor of the above place of business in front of the “F cafeteria” located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, the Defendant was able to ask the victim “I have been able to go to see.”

Accordingly, the defendant committed violence to the victim's inside side and breast part of the victim by drinking in a state where he was able to recover parking tickets from the side.

As a result, the defendant injured the victim for 14 days of treatment due to the damage of saves and saves, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D, H and I;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the victim did not inflict any injury on the victim as stated in the criminal facts in the judgment of the defendant. The victim's statements are consistent with the main part of the statement, are not inconsistent in light of the empirical rule, and are not inconsistent with the defendant's motive or reason to make a statement unfavorable to the defendant, and as long as the motive or reason to make a statement unfavorable to the defendant is not clearly revealed in light of the empirical rule, the defendant's statement should not be dismissed without any justifiable reason on the ground that the difference in the expression appears to be inconsistent or the first conclusive statement was changed to a somewhat unclear statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do5407, Nov. 23, 2006). According to the above legal principles, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the victim's statements correspond to the criminal facts from the investigative agency to the court.