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

At around 20:30 on April 1, 2013, the Defendant stated that the victim’s face is one of the two indictments with the victim’s own hand, while drinking alcohol together with the victim’s D (the age of 49). However, the Defendant stated that the Defendant was at the time from the police to this court, and that the witness E’s statement is consistent with this (the 46 pages), D’s statement as two, and it falls short of consistency (the 69 pages, 105 pages, and the 69 pages, and the 105 pages of the investigation record) and its statement as stated in its reasoning. Thus, the Defendant recognized that there is no concern about substantial disadvantages to the Defendant’s exercise of his/her defense right without any changes in the indictment.

The victim was floated out of the re-cafeteria, and the victim was float.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Some statements in the suspect examination protocol of the prosecution concerning D;

1. Some statements in the police statement of E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (the F's statement report of witnesses and the statement report of witnesses G);

1. Relevant Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;