A. On October 12, 2014, around 04:50 on October 12, 2014, the Defendant flabed and pushed down the flab of the victim E (the age of 40) who flabed alcoholic beverages in D’, while drinking alcoholic beverages in Songpa-gu Seoul.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

B. On October 12, 2014, around 04:50 on October 12, 2014, the Defendant: (a) while drinking alcohol in the “D” working for the Victim F in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b) G appears to have shown that he was able to take the back of the above E, she was able to take the back of the 40 minutes of the disturbance, such as assaulting the above E, a guest who had been located there, as described in paragraph (1).

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with G, interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

2. The judgment of the defendant can be recognized by the victim E’s balp bage by the witness E and F’s respective statutory statements. However, even when the above witness testimony, the defendant committed the above acts by speaking that G and the victim E put in fighting, and even according to the records of this case, the following circumstances revealed by the records of this case (i.e., ① the defendant’s daily balp G, who was the defendant’s daily balp, balping the victim E, prevented the defendant from balping the victim E, and balping the victim E to the above acts; ② the police officer dispatched upon receipt of the report, was called G as the victim’s victim’s balp balp, and other customers arrested him only by making a statement to the same effect. In addition, the defendant’s act of balping the victim’s falbage was conducted under drinking conditions.

Even if G and victim E fighting, it is not a behavior with the intent of assault due to one act in the intention to speak for the fighting of G and victim E.

Furthermore, it is the fact that the victim E exercised force by assault.