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

At around 22:00 on January 24, 2017, the Defendant, at the home of the Victim C (V, 28 years of age), had the victim and her husband D, etc., have made a verbal dispute between the victim and her husband D while drinking alcohol. At this time, whether the victim, who fladdd in the room, did not have yet to have his her flasium, had the victim flad with D.

D. If you do not have four houses, you will leave the house.

“The victim of the defect outside of the house” with the horses written out of the house.

“Written remarks,” and 3 times thereafter, the victim’s satisfy with both hands, and the victim’s satisfy, and assaulted the victim into the house.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of each legal statement statute in witness D and C;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant did not engage in any act, such as wrapping up the victim’s satisfy, as stated in its reasoning.

2. The evidence supporting the instant facts charged is only the victim C and D who is a witness.

And according to the records, the following facts are recognized:

(1) With respect to the defendant's act, C refers to "the defendant's house."

At the same time, the Defendant stated that he did not go to the front door, and that he was aware of his her her satis in his hand.

LAD means that "the victim would go to his/her own will" in this Court.

In addition, as the defendant gets off the victim's fluence and fluences, the victim was fluenced with the defendant, and the victim was fluenced.

Both sides of the doctrine were boomed with two descendants, and it is not a memory that they collected descendants in the future and walked up.

In front of the present official, the defendant was at the time of the second sentence.

“The police stated” and the police.