If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On January 24, 2013, at around 19:10, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by cutting off the body of the victim's chest and side glass, etc. on the left-hand side, the right-hand side of the 4-day closed d apartment site, the 50-year old d apartment site 211, which requires approximately 4 weeks of treatment, on the ground that the victim E (the 50-year-old 50-old d apartment site) puts the advertising site into the above apartment site upon which the victim E (the 50-year-old 50) entered into a contract for the distribution of the advertising leaflet, and caused the victim to go beyond the victim due to the shock.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

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

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate (E);

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 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted as to the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, claiming that the defendant exercised some tangible power for defense against an unjust infringement unilaterally committed by E and G.

In full view of the above evidence, it is reasonable to view that the defendant's act was due to an attack against the victim as stated in the facts constituting a crime, and in light of the circumstances and contents of the crime, it is reasonable to view that the defendant's act was due to the mixed intent of attack and defense, even if not, it constitutes self-defense. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel cannot be accepted.