Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

The defendant is a person who is the representative of the representative of the representative of the representative of the representative of the representative of the representative of the representative of the representative.

On July 18, 2011, at around 19:00, the Defendant: (a) observed that the victim A (the 50-year-old resident representative), who is the president of the resident representative, was removed from the apartment, and observed that it was released out of the apartment, and resisted to the right part of the victim with the right part of the victim's side blus, in front of the 108-dong apartment building 108-24, the Defendant used the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made to A by the police;

1. Investigation report (investigation following submission of CCTV evidence) and investigation report (report on telephone conversations A which is a criminal complaint);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a copy of an injury diagnosis certificate, a CD and a recording record;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment.

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the crime of this case constitutes an act to resisting the removal of the victim's arbitrarily, and thus, constitutes a legitimate act that is permissible

However, the "act that does not violate social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to the act which can be accepted in light of the overall spirit of legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and whether certain act is justified as a legitimate act that does not violate social rules, and thus, it should be judged individually by examining the motive or purpose of the act, the reasonableness of the means or method of the act, the balance between the third protected benefit and infringed benefit, the fourth urgency, and the fifth other means or method than the act.