Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

On November 22, 2018, at the beginning of Seocho-gu Seoul Central District Court 157, Seocho-gu, Seoul Central District Court 514, the Defendant: (a) misleads the Defendant that the Defendant sent text messages to his cell phone, and marks the victim’s photograph; and (b) the Defendant took the victim’s photograph, saying, “I am hyp. Dop. Dop. Dop. Dop. Dop. Dop. Dop. Dop. Dop. ? I am. I am. I am, I am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am. I am.) while I am. I am..

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of the USB Acts and subordinate statutes submitted by the complainant;

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. The act of using violent language, taking a bath, or displaying or throwing hands or things at the same time in a solid vicinity to the body of a victim guilty of Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the order of provisional payment, was not directly contacted by the victim;

Even if an unlawful use of force against a victim constitutes violence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do5716, Jan. 10, 2003), the circumstance of the instant case, and the degree of assault used by the Defendant cannot be deemed as a justifiable act in full view of all the circumstances. Thus, the facts charged in the instant case are found guilty.

Considering the circumstances that serve as the conditions for sentencing in the records and arguments of the instant case, including the developments leading up to the sentencing, etc., the sentence initially determined by the summary order is appropriate, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.