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

1. On August 29, 2013, at around 14:33, the Defendant obstructed the business operation of the victim’s pharmacy by force by preventing customers from entering the pharmacy and leaving the pharmacy of the victim’s pharmacy of the victim’s pharmacy of the victim’s “EA”, which was operated by the victim D in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, on the ground that he did not explain in detail the side effects of the drug between the above pharmacy and the Defendant, rather than disregarding the Defendant.

2. The Defendant, at the above time and place, exceeded a stroke, who was reported on the ground as above, and strokeed her hand with the head of the Victim F (F, 30 years of age) who was an employee, and strokeed about 3 times, the Defendant strokeed the victim with the two strokes requiring medical treatment for about 14 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each statement made by witnesses G, H, F, and D in the third protocol of trial;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. A protocol concerning the police investigation of suspect with regard to F;

1. A written statement of F and D;

1. On-site reports;

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

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Articles 314 (1) and 313 of the Criminal Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines for the crime;

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

1. The Defendant and the Defendant’s defense counsel on the assertion of the Defendant and the Defendant’s defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that the Defendant’s act constituted self-defense, since it occurred in the course of resistance against the collective verbal abuse and threat of pharmacy employees and pharmacists.

To establish self-defense, all specific circumstances, such as the type, degree, and method of infringement, the level of completion of infringement, and the type, degree, etc. of legal interests to be infringed by the defense act.