If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On October 20, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 20:00, the victim D (n, 62 years of age) operated in Gwangju-gu, Seo-gu; (b) the victim was in a trial room on the ground that the victim did not open the toilet door; and (c) the victim went beyond the body of the victim who was pushed the Defendant, embling the body of the victim on the floor; (d) the victim was in need of approximately two weeks of medical treatment; and (e) the victim was spambling the pelvis.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Examination protocol of police suspect regarding D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to medical certificates and copies thereof;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

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

1. The defendant asserts that the defendant's assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is only a victim of assault against D unilaterally, and that there is no fact of assaulting D by assaulting D.

However, according to the evidence of the judgment, we can find the fact that D, at around 23:20, passed after the time of vision between the defendant and D, applied to the emergency room of the F Hospital and appealeds, such as shoulder and the below.

In addition, according to the evidence of the judgment, D's statement at D's police is credibility, considering the following facts: although D's statement is recognized as being good for usual knee and knee, D's statement at the time of this case, considering the fact that D's statement at D's police is consistent in this court, it is deemed that D's statement is credibility.

Therefore, in full view of the evidence presented in the judgment, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted, since the facts charged in this case can be fully recognized.