A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Defendant

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

Defendant

A around 09:50 on April 6, 2017, on the road in front of Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, for the reason that the rapid movement of the victim FF (n, 44) is difficult on the roads in front of the Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, the victims were assaulted by each of the victims, who are shicking the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the witness F and B;

1. On-site photographs and recording records, investigation reports (the confirmation of the content of 112 reported), recording records, recording CDs [the defendant A and his/her defense counsel asserted that the defendant did not assault the victim, but according to the evidence, the facts of the judgment can be acknowledged according to the evidence. The witness G’s legal statement, which seems to conform to the defendant A’s assertion, is contrary to the content of the recording or recording, recording CDs at the time of the instant case, and thus, there is no credibility

Application of Statutes

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 260 of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines for criminal facts;

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. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is the order of provisional payment;

1. The summary of this part of the facts charged is around 09:50 on April 6, 2017 and around 09:50 on the road in front of Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and Defendant B assaulted the victim by putting the victim’s chest in his/her hands.

2. Only the victim A and G’s statements are available as direct evidence to acknowledge this part of the facts charged.

However, in light of the following circumstances, it is difficult to believe that the statements of A and G are not reliable, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize this part of the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① Defendant B’s cross-examination was not conducted on the grounds that the statement in the police interrogation protocol against A was not recorded on the interrogation of the suspect. Thus, credibility of the statement is itself.