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

On July 23, 2014, at around 01:10, the defendant argued that the victim E (the 48 years of age) and the victim and his/her daily behaviors are slicking, and that the victim's face is slicking, and that the victim's face is sleeped for about 28 days. On the other hand, when the victim's face is faced with drinking, the defendant injured the victim, such as sprinking, without any flood control that requires treatment for about 28 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. A witness E or F's partial statement in court;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. The defendant's assertion of on-site photographing video CD is asserted that his behavior constituted self-defense, since he only took the face of the victim one time to defend the attack from the victim first, his behavior constitutes self-defense. However, according to evidence, the defendant and the victim deemed that they committed mutual assault in the process of making a vision, and thus, the defendant's behavior cannot be deemed as self-defense. Thus, the above argument is rejected.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 257 (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;