2. The applicant for compensation shall be dismissed;

A. On June 1, 2013, at around 21:30 on June 21, 2013, the Defendant expressed the victim C (the 54 years of age) and Si expenses as a matter of construction work at the E office operated by the Defendant in Pyeongtaek-si D, and expressed the victim’s desire to “Cylea” as the problem of the cost of work, and then, the Defendant carried the victim’s left face one time with the victim’s hand, and the victim’s left part part part part of the face was pushed off with the glass door of the above office, thereby causing the victim’s injury such as elbowing and elbing the left part where the number of treatment days cannot be known.

B. According to the health stand, the witness C’s testimony, and the witness C’s statement in the third protocol of trial as to whether the victim suffered the same injury as the stated in the facts charged, it is recognized that the defendant was closely informed of the victim’s face, and that the defendant was faced with the back elbing in the glass door that the victim tried not to meet the victim, and then the victim was faced with the left part of the back elbow.

However, at that time, the defendant intended to injure the victim.

With regard to the fact that the victim suffered bodily integrity or harm to the physiological function beyond the scope of the upper part of the degree of natural therapy by facing the left part of the glass door, it is insufficient to recognize it only with the testimony of the witness C, the statement of the witness C, the victim's photograph, the statement (victim) in the third protocol of the trial, the part of the defendant's statement in C in the second protocol of the police examination of the defendant, and the part of the bodily injury (the part of the left part is stated only in the contents of the injury to the right part), the fact-finding letter (the record of emergency medical services and the result of X-ray photographing) and the statement of the fact-finding letter (the part of the defendant's second protocol of the police examination of the defendant, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

Thus, in this case, the defendant can not be punished as an injury, but can only be established as an assault crime.