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

On March 8, 2017, the Defendant stopped the DN vehicle at the front of C in Silung City on March 8, 2017, when the Defendant stopped, on the ground that the victim F, who driven the ESpo vehicle following the said NN vehicle, gets light, was cross-defensed, and used the victim’s body boom at the hand floor twice. The Defendant assaulted the victim.

(A) The defendant could be found to have actively responded to the defendant, such as getting off from the vehicle to the victim in the process of mutual vision with the victim, and the defendant could not get out of the place of harm to the defendant unless the victim is sealed.

Thus, the defendant's above act cannot be seen as a legitimate act.

(2) The Defendant’s motion picture, the Defendant’s motion picture, the Defendant’s motion picture, the Defendant’s motion picture, and the Victim’s motion picture

In light of the fact that the defendant stated the victim's second friendly act is merely a scarcity of self-rest;

(1) The summary of the evidence

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the boombox cream 1 and the gap between them

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 10 (2) and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate mental and physical weakness;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for the reason that Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (i.e., the fact that the accused has a number of violent crimes) is more than that of the Criminal Procedure Act;