Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

At around 18:00 on January 2, 2016, the Defendant was waiting to receive free food at Yongsan-gu Seoul Yongsan-gu 89-ro 51 and the National Love Council, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, for the reason that the Defendant’s remarks against the Green Cross, when the victim’s face was faced with her bucks and her drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Partial statement of the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Application of each statute on photographs of damage;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning the crime;

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

1. The defendant's assertion of Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is asserted to the effect that it is not unlawful as a self-defense, since the defendant committed an act as stated in its decision in order to defend against the victim at the time of the instant case.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the Defendant at the place of this case, the victim committed an assault as stated in its holding, such as reporting the Defendant, who was aged older than the Defendant, and the victim, who was bleeped against the Defendant, by drinking alone, and clicking the victim’s left side (30cm from her own), and thereby finding the fact that the victim got out of the victim’s safe side.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the defendant's act does not aim at defending the victim's unfair attack but at attacking with the victim, and it is reasonable to view that the defendant's act committed an attack with the intent of attacking with the victim. Since such an act has the nature of the act of attack at the same time as the act of attack

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Do228 delivered on March 28, 2000, etc.). Therefore, we cannot accept the Defendant’s assertion.