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

On May 21, 2017, the Defendant: (a) in front of the golf screen in Seosan-si B, Seosan-si; (b) on the ground that, on the ground that, on the ground of the fact that, on the ground of the fact that the victim, who was dispatched to the site after having received the report of the assault case, E, a police officer affiliated with D District of the Seosan Police Station D District Police Station, her husband, the reported person, G and witness H, “at the location of the reported person,” “at the time of launching, arrested the victim,” and “the two-year elderly correspondence were not a police officer’s qualification, thereby openly insulting the victim by publicly insulting the victim.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspect with respect to F;

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to E and G;

1. A H statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on accusation and video CDs;

1. Relevant Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant alleged that he was in a state of mental or physical weakness or mental loss under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime. Thus, according to the records, the Defendant was aware of drinking at the time of committing the instant crime, but in full view of the circumstances such as the background and result of the instant case, the Defendant’s behavior before and after committing the crime, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant did not have or lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the above assertion is rejected.