On November 201, 2016, the Defendant assaulted the victim on the ground that the victim D (23 tax) who was on the back seat of the head of C-si located in the front seat of the original State court located in 149, was able to take a bath for himself/herself, and was able to take the clothes of the victim, and forced him/her to take the clothes of the victim, and forced him/her to take them over, in front of the original State court located in 149.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 260 of the choice of punishment: Selection of a fine;

1. Suspension of sentence: Punishment postponed under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 300,000 won per day): The counsel’s assertion on the defense counsel under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act; although there are facts that the defendant puts the victim’s clothes as stated in the facts of the crime, this constitutes a self-help act.

Criminal Code 'self-help'

The term "in case where it is impossible to preserve a claim by legal procedure, it refers to an act to avoid the impossibility or significant difficulty of its execution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do9418, Mar. 15, 2007; 2006Do4328, May 11, 2007). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, it is possible to take measures, such as: (a) considering the fact that the defendant in this case was able to take measures to avoid the impossibility or significant difficulty of its execution; (b) considering that the defendant's act was a considerable act to avoid the impossibility or significant difficulty of its execution.

It is difficult to see it.

The defense counsel's assertion is without merit.