2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 16093, Jan. 1,

At around 22:20 on December 3, 2014, the Defendant: (a) was released from the restaurant by the police officer upon the victim’s report made by the victim under the contract under the contract under the contract under the contract under the contract of the victim’s agreement while drinking daily and drinking alcohol; (b) on the same day, at around 22:49, the Defendant returned to the restaurant and changed the Handphone; (c) however, the Defendant expressed the victim’s desire to “I return to the restaurant because there was no Handphone; (d) the victim’s chest was pushed up two times; (e) the victim’s chest was pushed up at around three times with drinking; and (e) the victim took part in the restaurant; (e) the victim took part in the restaurant; (e) the victim took part, and (e) the victim took part in the restaurant; and (e) the victim abused the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of C’s written statements and the Acts and subordinate statutes governing damaged parts;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for not less than Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.