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

At around 3:00 on August 17, 2015, the Defendant: (a) reported the victim F (22 years of age) and G, etc., while under the influence of alcohol in front of the building Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b) led the victim and G to H’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s sh’

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F, H and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 262, 260 and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of fines for the crime;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant's assertion as to the defendant's assertion under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is merely self-defense because the defendant did not have any causal relation with the defendant's act of assault or defense against the victim's act of attack. However, according to each of the above evidence adopted and investigated by this court, it is acknowledged that the injury of the victim's 5th double pelpelpelpelel was caused by the defendant's act of assault as stated in the criminal facts in the judgment of the defendant, and it is judged that it exceeded the simple defensive act within the limit permitted by social norms, and thus, the defendant's assertion is rejected.