If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The facts charged are modified according to the evidence and recognized as criminal facts to the extent that it does not materially disadvantage the defendant's right of defense.

On September 7, 2017, the Defendant: (a) looked at the victim D (39 years of age) for his/her own locked in Wancheon Prison C around 20:00; (b) stated that “at least 20 hours of age and 39 years of age,” and that “the victim’s face is narrow;” and (c) caused injury to the victim, i.e., damage to the victim’s face that requires two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Each police statement made to E and F;

1. Some statements made to G in the police statement protocol;

1. A H statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 257 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel regarding the argument of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the provisional payment order asserted that the Defendant and the defense counsel met only the victim’s face to defend the Defendant by first leaving the Defendant at the time, and thus, we examine whether the Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense or a legitimate act.

In full view of the above evidence, the victim first abused the defendant.

It is difficult to see it.

Even as the defendant asserts, the injured person first assaulted the defendant.

Even if considering all the circumstances such as the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the method and degree of injury inflicted on the victim, the result of the instant act, the Defendant’s intent at the time of the instant case, etc., the instant crime constitutes an active anti-influence by exceeding the limit of passive defensive act, and meeting the reasonableness of social norms.

It is difficult to see it.

In addition, the defendant's act does not violate social norms.