If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The Defendant was on the street in front of the Jung-gu Seoul Jung-gu Dong-dong, Seoul and moved to a destination after getting on the Do-si chief of D-si operated by the Victim C (43).

On June 14, 2017, around 21:30, the Defendant sought alcohol in the vicinity of the F Hospital located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, and the victim tried to do so, on the ground that “I am to do so, I am to do so,” and “I am to do so at any time, I am to do so” to the victim on the ground that “I am to do so.”

The victim, who was driven by drinking as soon as possible, assaulted twice the face side of the victim, who was driven by drinking, and tried to open a cab on the side side of the road, and tried to do so, and the victim was prevented by the victim, and the victim was able to stop by the victim, and the victim was able to stop by the victim, and the victim was able to do so only once.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Two copies of the report processing sheet 112;

1. Investigation report (verification of black stay images);

1. A photograph of a course of closure (26 pages for committing a crime, in the case of cambling video);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (verification of the booms and video images)

1. Article 5-10 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the point of assault by a driver), Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (a) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the order of provisional payment [The defendant and his/her defense counsel alleged that there was no assault against a victim on driving, but the victim’s statement has been consistently committed from the time of investigation to the time when he/she states as a witness;

This part of the statement is found guilty and it is alleged that the defendant assaults the victim outside the vehicle, but it is legitimate to do so, but at the time of assault recognized by the evidence above.