On December 18, 2013, around 23:40 on December 18, 2013, the Defendant suffered violence from D before the bus stops in the Gyeonggi-si Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, and claimed injury that requires approximately two weeks of treatment in light of flap, flap, and flap face by hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Witnesses D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to suspect D's damaged parts photographs and written diagnosis of injury;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Penalty fine of 500,000 won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (50,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act for the inducement of a workhouse;

1. The defense counsel's argument regarding the defense counsel under Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Code (the degree of assault by the defendant is deemed to exceed the scope of a justifiable act, but it is very minor if the defendant committed the crime, the victim is not punished, the defendant does not have any other penal power except once a fine has been imposed for the whole time) of the suspended sentence. The defense counsel argues that the crime of this case is a passive resistance, and the crime of this case is a legitimate act. However, according to the evidence adopted earlier, the defense counsel's argument that the defendant and the victim committed the crime of this case constitutes a legitimate act. However, in light of the above evidence, the defendant's act cannot be viewed as a justifiable act, since the defendant's act cannot be seen as a justifiable act.