If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

The Defendant, around 02:10 on June 6, 2017, was under the influence of alcohol on the part of the 323 military guards who were in the same way in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (Jeakdong) with the Victim C (19 years) who was under the influence of alcohol;

followed. Whether it is against

“Along with the climatic dispute, the victim’s face was expressed at several times due to drinking, and the victim was injured by approximately two weeks of NOS’s impairment, gambling, inspection, etc. in need of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the suspect's photograph and injury diagnosis report at the time of dispatch;

1. Article 257 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act concerning the confinement of a workhouse (the defendant and his/her defense counsel asserts that the act of the defendant constitutes legitimate defense.

In the process of fighting between the defendant and the injured party, the act of attack and defense has been committed consecutively and the act of defense has the nature of both the act of attack and the act of defense has the nature of both the act of attack.

In common, it is difficult to regard the Defendant’s act as a legitimate defense, in light of the fact that the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed as a legitimate defense, and the above assertion is rejected, since it cannot be viewed as a legitimate defense solely on the ground that the Defendant’s act does not constitute a legitimate defense solely on the ground that, in this case, the Defendant and the victim could not have known who first committed an attack, but the victim’s damage was obviously caused by the Defendant’s act

The reason for sentencing is that the defendant has a history of criminal punishment for the same crime, and the damage of the victim is also minor.

In full view of the sentencing conditions shown in the trial of this case, such as the fact that the amount of fine prescribed in the summary order is not excessive.