Therefore, even though the victim called that the defendant would not take a film, the defendant continued to have a defect in the photograph of video, and plucked up the hand of the defendant.

On the contrary, the Defendant assaulted the victim by means of flag, flag, flag, flag, flag, etc., and thereby suffered injury, such as an open wound, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment, to the victim.

2. The evidence that corresponds to the above facts charged in the judgment includes a statement and a written diagnosis of injury at the court and investigation agency, but the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, namely, the fact that the victim tried to take the cell phone of the defendant at the time, and the defendant again seems to have a hack, and the defendant's hacks do not seem to have a hack of the victim. Even after this Chapter, the victim did not mention all of the damage situations as stated in the facts charged while the defendant was in mutual speech with the defendant, and the police officer did not want to voluntarily attend the police box and voluntarily attend the police box at the time when the police officer was dispatched. In light of the following circumstances, it is difficult to believe that the above evidence is difficult to acknowledge it as it is, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise. Even if the defendant inflicts injury on the victim's hand in the process of hacking his own cell phone in order not to provide his own cell phone, this constitutes a passive act as provided for in Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the facts charged of this case are proven.