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

On September 5, 2016, in front of the D cafeteria located in Pyeongtaek-si C, the Defendant: (a) carried a brupt bb with the victim E ( South and 44 years old), who is a workplace volunteer, while under the influence of alcohol, brupted with the victim’s breath hand while bread, and bruddd the victim’s breath, and brudddd with the victim’s brub.

As a result, the defendant abused the victim, thereby leading the victim to a diversity typology on the left-hand side of the victim requiring approximately two weeks medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the argument is that the Defendant only carried the victim’s breath with his left hand at the time of this case, and there was no fact that the victim’s breath was frighted once and turned over the victim’s breath. Thus, the Defendant did not inflict an injury on the victim.

2. The following circumstances revealed in light of the facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, ① the victim consistently stated from the investigative agency to the effect that “the victim suffered injury, such as the victim’s spawnion and spawning the victim’s spathy on the ground floor once, and the victim suffered injury due to such violence,” ② the victim was treated at a nearby hospital on the day of the instant case, ③ the victim was treated at the nearest hospital, ③ the victim’s parts of the victim’s bodily injury taken after the instant case, ④ the victim was in excess of his/her own purpose to have the Defendant punished, but the victim’s injury was committed.