If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Defendant

And the victim D(n, 51 years old) are married couple.

The Defendant’s 13:40 on January 28, 2017, on the 14-1 World Cup stadium 2, the 604-Ch 14-1 World Cup games, and the Defendant’s 13:40 on August 28, 2017, whether the victim living separately for eight months in the EMW vehicle in the 604-1 World Cup stadium 2,

If she goes to go to her home or not.

"In accordance with this and vehicle keys, the defect in which the defendant was suffering from the two hand, putting the two arms of the victim, putting the belbow and string the head into the belbow, etc., and inflicting injury on the celbow in need of three weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. The result of factual inquiry about F hospital asserted that the defendant did not assault the victim on the ground of the voice recorded in the recording (Evidence No. 2) and CD (Evidence No. 3). However, the contents of the above evidence are merely the content of the defendant's request that the victim cancel the report of the victim because the defendant delayed reporting the victim to the police, and according to each evidence of the judgment, the fact that the defendant sustained the victim's body with the victim and inflicted the injury on the victim can be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, the above assertion by the defendant and his defense counsel is without merit.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (Selection of Penalty) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The Defendant’s judgment as to the defense of a political party or the assertion of a justifiable act under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is an act committed to avoid assault by the injured party and constitutes a legitimate defense or a legitimate act. However, considering the following as a whole, the Defendant’s decision exceeds the minimum degree of defense that can be recognized as a legitimate defense.