However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the part concerning the victim D and the victim E was revoked on the date of the third public trial and notified that the public prosecution was dismissed.

On September 21, 2019, around 02:20 on September 21, 2019, the Defendant assaulted the victim C’s face in front of the container B and in front of the container.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and C;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect against F, G, or H;

1. Adverse photo of the victim's cAssault damage;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs at occurrence site;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which are confined in a workhouse

1. Summary of the assertion

A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant was unilaterally faced with the victim and his behaviors, and there was no assault on the victim’s face when drinking.

(b)the existence of a physical contact for household affairs;

Even if it is unilaterally avoided, it constitutes a defense act to escape from it, which is a legitimate defense.

2. In a case where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator’s act of the relevant legal doctrine was committed with the intent of attacking one another rather than with a view to defending the victim’s unfair attack, and that the perpetrator’s act was committed against one another, it cannot be deemed as an act of defending a political party or excessive defense, since it has the nature of an act of attack at the same time as an act of attack (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Do228, Mar. 28, 200). 3. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court in light of the above legal principles, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the victim committed an assault as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, and such an act does not constitute a legitimate defense.