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

On September 16:30 on September 7, 2017, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the vehicle door in order for the injured to prevent any defect that the injured party intends to open a vehicle door and get off from the vehicle; (b) assaulted the victim’s left side part of the vehicle door in order to stop the defect that the injured party intends to get out of the vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Application of the investigative report (Attachment of suspect A vehicle black images) and photographic Acts and subordinate statutes attached thereto;

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. The Defendant asserts that, although the judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, the Defendant could not open the door of the vehicle in order to prevent the vehicle from being damaged, the victim did not have any assaulted.

However, in light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, namely, ① the Defendant opened several doors of the victim, and the victim’s bridge was frightened, and the victim’s bridge was frightened, ② the victim’s bridge was not closed in the process, and the Defendant appears to open and close the door even after being fully aware of the victim’s frighten in the process. As such, the Defendant assaulted the victim.

It is reasonable to view it.

The defendant and defense counsel are without merit.