2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 16090, Jan. 1

On October 1, 2016, around 11:36, the Defendant, at “D Hospital” located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, for the reason that the customer response of the victim E (e.g., 31 years old) who is in charge of the receipt of customers was not in mind, and assaulted the victim on a fluorpedped World Cup containing a heavy discharge on the chest part of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E, F and G;

1. Each police statement protocol against E and F (the defendant and his defense counsel) claimed to the effect that the defendant, while making a dispute with the victim E, set the franc World Cup on the received franck where the victim E was seated, and that there was no fact that the defendant was a franced World Cup containing the victim E as the chest part of the victim E as stated in the facts constituting the crime.

In such a case, where the statements of witnesses, including the victim, are mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, unless there exists any separate and reliable evidence that is objectively deemed to lack credibility from an objective perspective, it shall not be rejected without permission, and where the statements of the witness are consistent in the major parts of the statements, the credibility of the statements shall not be readily denied solely on the ground that the statements of the witness are somewhat inconsistent with the statements of other minor matters (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012; 2007Do10728, Mar. 14, 2008). According to each of the above evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the victim E is consistent and specifically stated in this court and investigation agency as a substitute for the acts of assault committed by the defendant, the situation before and after the crime, and the contents of the statements at the time of the crime are also the major contents of F's statements given by the witness at the time of the crime, and each of the victim and witness testimony are inconsistent with each EF.

In this regard, the two separate places are as follows. (Although the paper and World Cup of the defendant was faced with the chest part of the victim E, the two separate places are as follows.